.** 7 *„ 















■y, 



'!■ i<> 



.£% 


































O «," 









o <y 












> 






W 



V. .* 



,V •/> 



^ ^ 























































■■ .". . 


















' 



.Oo. 



^j. 






* s S 



'O0 v 

n* -71 



%f 






£ *+' 



o> s 




V ' c 







\ a ^ '^ V'-^T; 



/- y 



OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 



YUESliXTEUX 0¥ .YL"B.1>HJL. 



EXHIBITING THE 



3F&Jl&&iS 



Rgv. J«i\\u C\\esteY & Mr. ^Irok Tuckw. 



TOGETHER M IT 1 1 



THE WHOLE CASE 



Rev. Hooker Chimming 



Published by Order of the Presbytery, in conformity 
to a resolution of the Synod of Mbany. 



SCHENECTADY: 

PUBLISHED BY HENRY STEVENS # CO. 

J. Riggs, Printer. — 1818. 






l*W 



71165 



rt 



OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 



8CHKYECTADF, iSth February, 1817. 

The Presbytery of Albany met agreeably to 
adjournment, and after a sermon by the Rev. 
John Chester, from Philipians iii. 8. was con- 
stituted with prayer. 

PRESENT MINISTERS. 

Rev. NOAH M. WELLS, Moderator. Me f er / 

Rev. SIMON HOSACK, D. D. S^ST" 

Rev. ELIPHA LET NOTT, D. D court 

Rev. THOMAS HALIDAY, 

Rev. REUBEN SEARS, 

Rev. JONATHAN HOVEY, 

Rev. JOHN CHESTER, 

Rev. HOOPER CUMMING, 

Rev. HALSEY A. WOOD, 

Rev. REUBEN SMITH. 

ELDERS. 

Ananias Platt, 1st Church, Albany, 

John L. Winne, 2d Church, Albany, 

James Frazer, Johnstown, 

John Murphy, New Scotland, 

Joseph Hanchard, Milton, 

Alexander Kelly, Schenectady, 

Evert Hagerman, Amsterdam, 

John M'Crea, Ballston, 

Jonathan I.Clayton, Duanesburgh, 

Sylvanus Parkinson, Carlisle, 

Earl Stimson, East Galway, 

Samuel Jones, West Galway, 

John Chamberlain, Charlton, 

Abraham Beecher, Edinburgh, 



Dr. Nott was chosen moderator, and Mi. 
Wood, clerk, for the ensuing year. 

A memorial was presented by com mis- 
applies to* sioners from the third presbyterian congre- 
be received gation of Albany, requesting that they might 
be taken under the care of presbytery. 

On motion, resolved, that this request be 
granted. 
3d Church The commissioners presented a call from 
cafuo^ip * ne tQ ird presbyterian congregation, Albany. 
Cumming. for the Rev. Hooper Curnming. 

Ordered, That it lie on the table. 
d^cmfsen^s ^ comm unication from the congregation 
to a <iisso- of Schenectady, was laid before presbytery, 
hischar'e declaring* that they should not oppose the re- 
moval of the Rev. Hooper dimming, from 
his present charge. 

The call having been found in order, was 
put into the hands of Mr. Cumming for his 
consideration. Mr. dimming informed pres- 
tiiecan. P S hytery that he had for some time considered 
the subject, and deemed it his duty to accept 
the call. 

Resolved, That the pastoral relation be- 
dy vacant 'tween the Rev. Hooper Cumming and the 
congregation of Schenectady, be and hereby 
is dissolved. 

Mr. Wood was appointed to announce the 
same from the pulpit on the next Lord's day. 
Mr Winne ^ r - J° nn k. Winne then stated that corn- 
states re- mon fame charges a member of this presby- 
gaiost'a ter y w ^h u ncnr i s li an walk, and requested 
member of that a committee be appointed to enquire 
presbytery wne jh er these charges be of a nature to re- 
quire the notice of this court. 
Acommit- Whereupon, Resolved, That Drs. Nott and 
tee ti-ate Hosack and Mr. M'Crea be a committee to 
3 ' enquire into the same, and if they shall be 
found such as to require the judicial inter- 



uitiice of Ibis presbytery, the committee 
sli II specify the charges and name the wit- 
nesses, by whom they may be substantiated. 

The committee to whom was referred the 
resolution passed at the suggestion of Mr. 
Winne brought, in the following report : 

" That they have attended to the painful £"£ 
duty assigned them and regret to be obliged port. 
to state, that after mature deliberation and 
patient enquiry, that some of the reports in 
circulation are such that in their opinion this 
presbytery cannot without a violation of its 
trust, suffer them to pass without enquiring 
into the same, as well for the honor of reli- 
gion as to afford the individual impeached 
an opportunity of repelling them if false. 

" That the member alluded to is the Rev. 
Hooper Cumming, and that the charges and ^Tm?. 
witnesses are as follows: Cumming. 

" I. PLAGIARISM. 

" In preaching the compositions of other 
men in place of his own composition, and 
endeavouring to induce a belief that they 
were his own. 

" WITNESSES. 

Chancellor Kent, E. F. Backus, 
Thomas M'Auley, William Johnson, 
Rev. John Chester, Samuel S. Davis, 
Benjamin B. Wisner, William Adams. 

" II. BREACH OF PROMISE. 

•' i. Specification. Promise solemnly and 
deliberately made to Dr. Richards and the 
Rev. Mr. Spring, not to make so free use as 
he had done of other men's labours, and to 
the presbytery of Jersey of future and con- 
tinued amendment. 

" WITNESS. 

" Minutes of the Presbytery of Jersey. 



(.'omui it- 
tee's re- 
port. 



6 

" ii. Specification. Breach of similar de- 
clarations made to other individuals. 



" WITNESSES. 

Charges a- " Dr. M'Auley, Mr. Jonathan Crane. 

srainst Mr. ^ 



gainst 
Cuinming 



" HI. DELIBERATE FALSEHOOD AND PREVA- 
RICATION. 

" i. Specification. In denying that he had 
preached Topladys Sermons in Albany, as 
reported, and in speaking of said report as a 
slander. 

" WITNESSES. 

" Charles R. Webster and Wife, 

Thomas M'Auley, 

Rev. Robert B. E. M'Leod, 

Col. Charles Kane. 
'* ii. Specification. In denying that he 
had preached Mr. Channing's Sermon at 
Milton on the 1 1th December, as reported, 
and in representing, contrary to truth, the re- 
sult of a conversation had with Mr. Chester 
and several other gentlemen, in Albany, on 
that subject. 

" WITNESSES. 

' Dr. Thomas M'Auley, William Johnson, 
Jonathan Crane, Alexander Kelly, 

Uriah Marvin, and Isaac Hutton. 

' ; in. Specification. In declaring that his 
manuscripts had been submitted to the 
chancellor of the state, who had compared 
the same with Toplady, and acquitted him 
of the plagiarism imputed. 

" WITNESSES. 

" Rev. Robert B.E. M'Leod, 

Charles R. Webster and Wife, 
Miss Abigail Steele, 
Thomas M'Auley." 

The chairman of the committee, Dr.Nott, 
having read the report, which he accompa- 



of the com- 
mittee. 



med with some explanatory remarks, stated to 
presbytery that tho" there were other floating stotemen 

» ■ ■ ~ uv the 

reports, the committee had not been referred chairman 
to any source of information concerning' them ; 
that on the subject of intemperance, although 
there had appeared before them evidence of 
some levities and indiscretions, which were 
for the most part of a private nature, and 
might justify private caution and advice, still, 
nothing had appeared before them as far as 
they had heard the witnesses that justified a 
ch 'rge on that subject, nor did it appear 
that even the reports were so public as to re- 
quire investigation ; that the committee 
wished therefore, to lay that charge entirely 
out of the question, and he now made these 
remarks to take off, from the minds of the 
members of presbytery, any undue effect 
arising therefrom, and that he might place 
Mr. Cummings character in as benign alight 
on that article as he could, having done this 
he had discharged his duty to presbytery and 
to Mr. Cumming as w r ell as he was able, on 
the painful subject submitted to them. 

The moderator having resumed the chair, Enquiry a; 
Mr. Cumming wished to know whether it {£„£} p „£ 
was the fact, that public fame did so loudly lie fame in 
proclaim the charges as to require the judi- Jj® piem ' 
cial interference of this presbytery. The 
committee had given it as their opinion, he 
wished to know whether the presbytery 
agreed with them. 

A motion was made that presbytery disa- 
gree with the committee, and that their re- 
port be rejected ; which motion was lost. 

A motion was made to introduce testimony 
to prove the fact of the public fame ; which 
motion was afterward withdrawn. 

A motion was made and carried to insti- 



lute an enquiry of all the ministers and el- 
ders present, as to the extent of public fame. 

The enquiry being ended, on motion re- 
commit- 1111 c l 

tee's report solved that the report ot the committee be 

accepted. acce p te d. 

On motion, resolved, that a copy of there- 
port of the committee be put in the hands of 
Mr. dimming ; which was done. 
Mr. Cum- Mr. Cu mming stated to presb\tery that as 
'"leftside- the charges against him referred to the re- 
'> cords of the presbytery of Jersey, and he also 

had witnesses in Jersey to be procured for 
his defence, he could not be ready for trial 
earlier than the fourth Tuesday in April next. 
Whereupon, resolved, That the presbytery 
will proceed to the trial of the Rev. Hooper 
Cumming on the above charges, on the 4th 
poi"nteTfor Tuesday (22d) of April next, in the presby- 
his trial, teriaii church in Schenectady, at two o'clock. 
P. M. and that the stated clerk cite the par- 
ties concerned, together with their witnesses, 
as the constitution of the presbyterian church 
directs. 
Committee Resolved, That the committee to whom Mr. 
gatJoBmay WttWies's resolution was referred be directed 
.tail a meet- to meet at their discretion, and that if any 
byfery. preS f acts or circumstances connected with the 
charges already on record shall come before 
them of sufficient importance to require a 
meeting of presbytery previous to the meet- 
ing for the trial of Mr. Cumming, they sh dl 
take measures to convene the same, and that 
the stated clerk be directed to cite such wit- 
nesses as he shall be directed to cite by said 
committee or by Mr. Cumming, according to 
the constitution of the presbyterian church, 
always giving notice to the parties respect- 
ively of the names of witnesses so cited. 
The following is a list of witnesses furnish- 



ed bv Mr. Gumming — Lawrence VanKleeck, Ml - , Cum " 

miDg's 
nesses. 



Daniel C. Price, Peter E. Elmenriorf, John 



T. B. Graham, Isaac Lucas, Miss Abigail 
Steele, Rev Thoraa« Pictou, Rev. Buckley 
Carl, Mrs. dimming wife of Rev. Hooper 
Gumming. Uriah Marvin, Isaac Hutton, 
Richard Duncan, William Eaton, George 
M'Queen, James Baily 

The moderator stated, that the committee 
had discharged a very painful dntv in inak- Mo(,erat01 ' 

,.•■', • urges an 

iitg the report which had been accepted, interview 
He did not mean to intimate an opinion in 5!2 |* r « 
favor of the truth of the charges tabled, but m prevent 
so extensive was the public fame that presby- [Jf al needof 
tervweie bound to take notice of it, for their 
own s ikes as well as for the sake of Mr. 
Gumming and the church ; still he thought 
they h id a duty to perform. He read the 
5th section of the 1st chapter of forms of 
process, and added that the presbytery had 
had a Ions; session, and he knew were anx- 
ious to adjourn, yet he did hope that they 
would consent to remain until to-morrow 
morning, and appoint a committee to con- 
verse with Mr. Gumming, and see if there 
was no way left to prevent the business from 
going to a public trial : if there was not, he 
should have performed the last duty he owed 
Mr. Gumming and to the public on this af- 
flicting business. 

Presbytery consented to meet to-morrow ^""JJ] 
morning. Mr. Gumming opposed the ap- ses. 
point -Dent of a committee, said his family 
was sick and he coidd not wait on any com- 
mittee that evening at his house ; he was 
exhausted himself and though he should al- 
w -iys be willing to see any of his brethren 
who called on him, still, since the business 
had come before presbytery, he did not 



A commit- 



10 

wish to have it settled, but chose to have it 
go to a public trial. 

The moderator said that he had nothing 
more to say — he had expressed what he 
deemed was his duty ; but if Mr. Cumming 
was opposed to it, he would not press it. 

Mr. Haliday wished Mr. Cumming to 
withdraw — he did. 

He then moved a resolution for the ap- 
pointment of a committee to converse with 
Mr. Cumming, and see if he would not make 
some concessions or give some explanations 
that might prevent the necessity of a trial. 

The moderator begged the presbytery to 
on Mr. doit, possibly it might be attended with suc- 
cumming. cess and it could jo no injury. Mr. Hali- 

day's resolution was carried and Dr. Nott 
and Mr. Haliday were appointed a commit- 
tee. 

Mr. Cumming was called in and inform- 
ed of what had taken place. He said that 
he could not possibly see them that evening ; 
but if the presbytery were disposed to wait, 
he would meet them to-morrow morning. 

Adjourned to meet to-morrow at 10 o'clock 
— concluded with prayer. 

Friday morning, 10 o'clock. 
Commit- Met according to adjournment and opened 
tee's re- with prayer. The committee appointed to 
KtorSew" 5 converse with Mr. Cumming reported, that 
with Mr. they had met with him and begged him if 
Cummmg. t nere was anv thing in which he thought he 
had done wrong, to give presbytery some sa- 
tisfaction. 

That he told them that he had nothing to 
acknowledge; that he was a persecuted man, 
and that he should put his defence on the 
ground of persecution. 

On motion, resolved, that Dr. Hosack and 



11 

Elder MCrea, be a committee to conduct "^ 
the trial of Mr. Gumming on the part of bis trial. 
presbyters. 

The following communication was banded 
to the moderator by Mr. Kelly, and read from 
the chair. 

" Mr. Moderator, 

The Commissioners appointed to prose- Communi- 
cate a cail of the Rev. Hooper dimming-, for Messrs.™ 1 " 
the third Presbyterian Society in the city of Eaton, 
Albany, would' respectfully suggest, that the SIlIS^ 
said call having been presented to and ac- stating 
cepted by Mr. Cumming, they, as members LJJJf'Mr 
of the Society, feel a lively interest in what- Chester & 
ever relates to his character, as well as the e ..'' ac " 
character of the members of this presbytery. 

They would in connection with this subject 
state, that common fame charges the Rev. 
John Chester, one of the ministers of this 
presbytery and Mr. Mark Tucker a licenciate 
under its care, with conduct unbecoming the 
christian character, and would respectfully 
request that a committee be appointed to as- 
certain and report whether the charges arc 
of such a nature as to require the investiga- 
tion of the same. 

(Signed) William Eaton, 

Isaac Lucas, 
John T. B. Graham.^ 
On motion, 

Resolved, that Dr. Eliphalet Nott, Rev. 
Mr. Haliday and Mr. Kelly, be a committee 
to enquire whether the charges referred to be a commit 
of a nature to require the judicial interfer- tee t0 in 
ence of this presbytery, and if so to reduce vest,gate 
them to form, and report the same, together 
with the witnesses to substantiate them. 

Closed with prayer. 



ALBANY, MARCH 14tli, 181T. 
Presbytery met at the presbyterian church 
in the city of Albany, in consequence of a 
call from the moderator. Present as fol- 
lows : 

Members R ev . ELIPH A LET NOTT, D. D. Moderator. 

coin. Rev. THOMAS HALIDAY, 
Rev. JOHN CHESTER, 
Rev. NOAH M. WELLS, 
Rev. HOOPER CUMMING, 
Rev. HALSEY A. WOOD, Clerk, 
Rev. REUBEN SMITH. 

ELDERS. 

Isaac Hutton, 1st Church, Albany, 

John L Winne, 2d Church, Albany, 

Daniel Chandler, Schenectady, 
Nathaniel Booth, Ballston, 
Svlvanus Parkinson, Carlisle, 
James Wands, New Scotland. 

The committee to whom was referred a 
communication laid before presbytery at its 
last meeting, and signed by Messrs. Eaton, 
Graham and Lucas, informed presbytery that 
The com- they were prepared to report on the same. 
ports, 6 with Leave being granted, the chairman of the 
an expian- committee read the report (see the same as 
the°chair- amended page 14) and then stated, that du- 
man. r j n g the sittings of the committee it had been 
declared that it was reported in Albany that 
Mr. Chester had been guilty of falsehood in 
a declaration he made at Schenectady, be- 
fore the committee appointed on Mr. Cum- 
ming's case (of which committee the chair- 
man of the present was chairman) as this al- 
leged falsehood, if it did take place, was in 
the breasts of that committee, and therefore 
private ("because its proceedings were confi- 
dential ;) and as the assertion that a trans- 



la 

action s;»id to have taken place before them, T1,e coa >- 

• c* 1 L l j • i l L mittee re- 

on one day in SScnenect d\ ana said to nave por u, with 
become public fame on the very next day in * x ve . rbal . 
Albany, seemed to impeach their fidelity with t.on. 
respect to the- trust reposed in them, this com- 
mittee did not feel at liberty to incorporate 
that charge of f dsehood in their report; still, 
however, they deemed it their duty to state 
the fact to presbytery: and as the commit- 
tee were desirous that every individual con- 
cerned, should have it in his power to avail 
himself of the whole truth, and that the en- 
tile case in all its connections should come 
fairly and fully before presbytery, without 
any concealment or disguise, they are now 
as members of this presbytery willing- to 
have their report so modified as to embrace 
this charge also, if it shall be deemed expe- 
dient. 

On motion of Mr Chester, the report was The rt 
recommitted tor the purpose suggested. recommit- 

The chairman of the committee then fur- ted% 
ther stated, that an additional charge, in- 
volving several specifications, against Mr. 
Mark Tucker; (which has become public 
since the appointment of this committee, and 
had been laid before them in a private com- 
munication) had been under their considera- F urtner 
tion : this charge the committee of course did statement 
not feel at liberty to incorporate in their re- ^ e c ° m ' 
port ; still however, for the reasons already 
stated, they were willing and desirous, if 
Mr. Tucker would consent that the said 
charge should also be embodied therein. 

Mr. Tucker being present did consent ; f the 
and the committee were farther directed to Court ' 
modify their report accordingly. 

[Recess till 3 o'clock.] 

The committee whose report had been re- 



14 

committed presented the same as amended, 
in the words following : 

" The committee whose report upon the 
communication signed by Messrs. Eaton T 
Graham and Lucas, was recommitted for 
amendment, 

" REPORT 

Report of <c That a ft er m uch enquiry and mature de- 
mittee a P - liberation, they are of opinion that the reports 
pointed to i n circulation, are of such a nature and so 
veportifa- 6 widely spread, that it is the duty of the pres- 
Ch nStM & ^ytery to searcn m ^° tne same, that if they 
Mr! Tuck- can be substantiated, the presbytery may 
er - stand acquitted of unfaithfulness ; and if 

they are false, the individuals impeached 
may have it in their power to repel the ca- 
lumny. In presenting to presbytery the char- 
ges alleged, the committee have adhered to a 
written statement handed to them by the 
above named gentlemen, adding to the same 
nothing but the requisite specification of time, 
place and persons, as given by those gentle- 
men, or by the witnesses to whom the com- 
mittee were referred." 

[Here the chairman suspended the read- 
expiains. ing of the report to remark, that in referring 
to the written communication of Messrs. Ea- 
ton, Graham and Lucas it was not the de- 
sign of the committee to place them before 
the public in the light of prosecutors; he be- 
lieved they made their communication in 
writing at the request of the committee ; that 
they appeared before the committee only 
when requested, and had conducted with 
uniform propriety when they were before 
them. The charges reported by the com- 
mittee to the presbytery, are reported on their 
own responsibility. Not that it is their in- 
tention to intimate an opinion as to their 



lb 

truth : the committee have not enquired af- 
ter truth, but after report ; and have endea- 
voured to reduce mere report to some tangi- 
ble form, and bring it before presbytery. 
And though common fame says much that is 
false, they do believe, if she impeaches a 
member of this body, and information of the 
fact comes before them, in their judicial ca- 
pacity, that they owe it to the members im- 
peached, to the church and to God, solemn- 
ly and without favour or affection to try that 
impeachment according to law and evidence, 
that they may bring the truth to light, and 
place it by their solemn and deliberate deci- 
sion before the public] 

* The form of the charges as made out by Commit- 
the committee, is as follows : tee's repent 

"I. Common fame charges the Rev. John C0 " tinuc,L 
Chester, with the industrious circulation of 
reports, injurious to the character of the 
Rev. Hooper dimming, to wit: preaching 
at Milton on the 11th of Dec. 1816, a c,, . ar f es M a " 

n t\ -\/r /-m • gainst Mr. 

sermon ot the Rev. Mr. Channing. Chester. 

il 11. With making, when in conversation 
with Mr. Mark Tucker, a charge of intox- 
ication against the Rev. Hooper dimming, 
at the house of U. Marvin, and with false- 
hood in denying the same when charged 
therewith, in the presence of U. Marvin 
and I. Hutton." 
The report was accepted. Ordered, That 

copies of it be furnished to Mr. Chester and 

Mr. Tucker. 

After recess : 
On motion, Resolved, That this presby- Trial of 

tery will institute a trial of the Rev. John t ^* an C d h M r . 

Chester and of Mr. Mark Tucker, on the Tucker a P - 

above charges. r 0,nted - 

Resolved, That presbytery will proceed to 



10 

the trial of the Rev. John Chester on Tues- 
day, the 8th day of April next, at the first 
presbyterian church in the city of Albany, at 
11 o'clock, A. M. 

Ordered That the stated clerk cite both 
parties and their witnesses, to appear at the 
same time and place. 

to condict The Rev ^° lh M ' We,ls and tne elder 
the same. Isaac Huttoii, were appointed a committee to 

conduct the trial. 

Resolved, That presbytery will proceed to 
the trial of Mr. Mark Tucker immediately af- 
ter the trial of the Rev. John Chester shall 
be closed and that the same committee con- 
duct both. 

Ordered, That the stated clerk cite the 
parties and their witnesses, 
order res- Besolvcd, That it shall be the duty of the 

pectins; ci- ' . . * i n 

tations of stated clerk to cite all such witnesses as snail, 
witnesses. ^ en f | avs p rev ious to the time of trial, be nam- 
ed to him by either of the parties, always 
communic iting to the one party the names of 
any witnesses cited by request of the other. 

Dr. Nott introduced the following resolu- 
tions, which being- read and considered, were 
Rules of ar ^°P te ^ as rules of this presbytery, viz : 
order to be I. Witnesses in nil trials before this pres- 
^j 1 ^!'" by tery shall have the charge or charges on 
trials. which the accused are to be tried, read to 
them ; after which their testimony shall be 
taken down. The accused shall be at liber- 
ty to cross examine them, as shall also every 
member of the judicatory, but no question 
shall be put or answered but through the 
moderator. 

II. No question shall be put to any wit- 
ness, unless by unanimous consent, till it be 
reduced to writing : when answered it shall 
be handed to the clerk, (if deemed of any im- 



portance, either bv the presbytery or by the R " lesof 

1 . -i i *• i order to be 

accused) that it may with the answer, be re- observed in 

corded. J r °ai s UCtins 

IH. Questions of order, if an appeal is 
made from the chair, shall be decided with- 
out debate, unless at an interlocutory meet- 
ing. This rule shall not be construed, to 
preclude the accused from stating- his rea- 
sons for believing why any question he wish- 
ed to put to a witness had a bearing on his 
cause, or the committee from urging any 
reason against its being- put 

Saturday morning, 6 o'clock, met and 
opened with prayer. Dr. Nott introduced 
the following resolution which was read and 
adopted as a rule of presbytery. 

IV. In all the trials pending before this 
presbytery, every witness cited shall be con- 
sidered as cited tor the whole prosecution, and 
may be examined on either of the charges. 

Order' d, That the stated clerk serve each 
of the individuals cited to answer, with a co- 
py of this resolution. 

On motion of Mr. YVinne. presbytery pro- 
ceeded to reconsider the resolution fixing the 
time of the trials of Messrs. Chester and 
Tucker. 

It was moved to alter the same from the 
8th of April to the 25th of March, and the 
question being Uken, the votes stood as fol- 
lows : 

Ayes.— Mr. Haliday, Mr. Chester, Mr. 
Wood, Mr Winne, and Mr. Parkinson. — 5. 

Nays, — Mr. Cumming, Mr. Smith, Mr. 
Chandler, Mr. Booth, and Mr. Hutton.— 5. 

The moderator giving the casting vote in 
the affirmative ; the motion was carried. 

On motion of Mr Cumming, presbytery 
reversed this decision, and the time for the 
3 



IS 

trials remained as before determined. Ad- 
journed. Closed with prayer. 

■»@,«» 

ALBANY, APRIL 8th, 1817. 
Presbytery met according to adjournment, 
and was constituted with prayer by the mo- 
derator. 

PRESENT AS FOLLOWS. 
MINISTERS. 

Members Rev.ELIPH A LET \ T OTT, D. D. Moderator. 
°J th \ SIMON HOSACK, D. D. 

THOMAS HALIDAY, 

JOHN CHESTER, 

NOAH M. WELLS, 

HOOPER CUMMlNG, 

HALSEY A. WOOD, 

REUBEN SMITH. 

ELDERS. 

Isaac Hutton, 1st Church, Albany, 

John L. Winne, 2d Church, Albany. 
James Wands, New-Scotland. 

Jonathan Crane, Schenectady, 
James Ferguson, Duanesburgh, 
Joseph Clizbee, Amsterdam, 
Henry Pawling, Johnstown. 
Rev. J. M. Bradford, D D. and the Rev. 
John De Witt, of the classis of Albany. Rev. 
Jonas Coe, D. D. and the Rev. Samuel 
Blatchford, D. D of the presbytery of Co- 
lumbia, being present, were invited and took 
their seats as corresponding members. 
Mr. Ches- The committee appointed at the last meet- 
ter's tnai. j n g to con duct the trials of the Rev. John 
Chester and Mr. Mark Tucker, being ready- 
to proceed, the stated clerk informed the 
presbytery, that he had forwarded citations to 
all the witnesses whose names were on the 
list furnished by Messrs. Eaton, Graham and 



19 

Lucas, as the same was handed him by the Ml - Ches - 

^ ter's Trial. 

committee — viz. 



Dr. Nott, Dr. Hosack, Isaac Hutton, Uri- 
ah M urvin, Rev. H Camming, Dr Willard 
and wife, Abraham Bights, Chancellor Kent, 
Cfa irles R. Webster, Theodoras V. W. Gra- witnesses 
ham. Gilbert Stewart E. F. Backus, John cited - 
L. VVione, J. Board man, Mark Tucker, Ma- 
jor Smith, Mr. J. W run, Chester Bulkley. 

The charges were then read to Mr. Ches- 
ter; after which the moderator addressed 
the court and the defendant on trial, in the 
words following : 

" Brethren, 

" After many years of peace and tran- 
quility in our churches, we meet under cir- 
cumstances peculiarly afflictive. Two of our Mo , Iera . 
ministers and one of our licentiates, have been tor's ad- 
im peached, and we are now to enter on the llress - 
solemn and the painful duty of trying those 
impeachments. 

Some of the allegations in the cause now 
to issue, involve the doctrine ofSiantler which 
is of two kinds, deliberate and inconside- 
rate. 

Deliberate Slander, is the telling of either 
truth or falsehood, for the purpose of produc- 
ing misery. 

Inconsiderate Slander, is the telling of ei- 
ther truth or falsehood that tends to produce 
misery, without a due regard to consequen- 
ces. 

Under one or the other of these definitions, 
is comprehended slander of every sort ; and 
the telling of either truth or falsehood, that is 
not comprehended under the one or the other, 
is not slander. 

In the prosecution of the cause now at is- 
sue, as well as in the prosecution of another 



$0 

Mr. thes- cause pending; before this judicature, it will 

ten's Trial. , v ° A . .. . j* , . * • 

be necessary to distinguish between making 



Modera- a charge ; asserting a fact ; circulating a re- 
tor's ad- joo/*/, and giving an opinion or joining in a 
conversation concerning a report already cir- 
culated. 

For, though every man is responsible to 
God and to society, for the charges he makes, 
for the facts he asserts, for the reports he cir- 
culates, for the opinions he gives, and for the 
conversations he joins in ; these several things 
are distinct, and, because they are so, no 
man can be rightfully tried for the one, under 
an allegation for the other. 

After charges are made out, whatever lati- 
tude may have before been allowed, the im- 
port of the terms in which they are expressed, 
constitutes a boundary, which, during the 
enquiry, ought not to be transgressed, and 
which indeed cannot be, unless by consent, 
without hazarding the truth and violating the 
rights of the accused. For, though innocent, 
and though prepared to make his defence 
against the charges on record, and which he 
expects to meet, he may not be prepared to 
defend himself against a charge which he did 
not expect to meet, and which is covertly 
placed on the record, and becomes inferen- 
tially, and by surprize to him, a point at issue. 

To make a charge against a man of a 
crime, is to charge in terms against that man 
that crime. 

To assert a fact, is to assert that the thing 
spoken of did exist or take place. 

To circulate a report is to convey the know- 
ledge of it to some one person at least, who 
was not previously in the possession of it. To 
circulate a report industriously, is to convey 
the knowledge of it to several or many such 



21 

poisons. To circulate it slanderously, is to JJj^ £*>«£ 
convey the knowledge of it with a direct view v^py^ 
to misery, when it becomes deliberate slan- Modera- 
der, or it is to circulate it without a due re- jJeJ,, 1 " 1 " 
gard to consequences, when it becomes incon- 
siderate slander. 

In trials of slander, where the allegation is 
the making a charge, the asserting of a fact 
or the circulating a report, it is the motive at 
the time of charging, asserting, or circulat- 
ing, and not the truth or falsehood of the thing 
charged, the fact asserted, or the report cir- 
culated, that gives the act of charging, assert- 
ing. or circulating, the character of slander ; 
and it is only because it is assumed, in the 
present instance, that the acts of charging 
and circulating have that character, that they 
can be brought to trial under a charge in the 
present form, which is for the industrious cir- 
culation of reports injurious to the character 
of the Rev. Hooper Gumming. It is the in- 
juriousness of a report that makes it slander- 
ous. Reports, therefore, which are not in- 
jurious, whatever else they may be, are not 
slanderous ; and, because they are not, can- 
not be tried under an allegation of slander. 
Of this nature is undeserved praise, or the 
circulation of untruths in a man's favour. — 
Both are offences against morality, but the 
offender must be tried, if tried at all, under 
a charge of criminal partiality in the one case, 
and for falsehood in the other; and not, in 
either case, for slandering his brother. 

In trials for slander, whether before civil 
or ecclesiastical courts, but especially before 
ecclesiastical, the truth is allowed to be giv- 
en in evidence. But though the truth is to 
be allowed to be given in evidence, and 
though, where this defence is not set up, the 



dress 



Mr. Ches- defendant may be allowed to show that there 
^? ^ ' was l t the time credible grounds to believe 
iviod.-ra- thut the m'ttie charged, or the report circulate 
tor's ad- cd, was true ; still not the satisfactorily show- 
ing of this, nor even the satisfactory establish- 
ment of the trnth itself, shall, if the motive be 
bad, or even defective, be deemed by the judi- 
cature a justification, so that the crime charg- 
ed, or the report circulated, shall be decl r^ 
ed no slander. The truth or falsehood may 
indeed diminish or increase the degree of 
criminality, but it will not alter the nature 
of the action, which is ascertained and set- 
tled by the motive in charging or circulating, 
and not by the matter circulated or charged. 
And the pleading of the t?uth in evidence 
where the plea itself is false, is at once an 
evidence of malice and an aggravation of the 
previous offence. 

The circulation of either truth or falsehood, 
unqualified by motive, is not a moral action. 

The circulation of either truth or falsehood, 
where the motive is bad, or even defective, 
is slander. 

On the contrary, neither the circulating of 
truth or falsehood, where the motive is good 
and the manner unexceptionable, is slander. 

The benign communication of an evil re- 
port to a father, of his son ; to a guardian, of 
his ward ; or to a moral association, of one 
of its members, the motive being the good of 
the accused, is not slander. 

The communication of an evil report, to 
third persons believed to be in danger, to put 
them on their guard against imposition or 
injury, the motive being the good of others, 
is not slander. 

The communicating an evil report in pro- 
secuting an offender before the proper tribu- 



nal, the motive being public justice, is not Mr ; £*«*■ 
slander: and finally, the communicating; an 



tor i 
dress. 



evil report, when the communication is inse- Madera- 
p i .blf from the due performance of some in- 
dispeusihle duty, the act being unavoidable, 
is not slandt r. 

With respect to making enquiries, holding 
conversations and giving opinions concerning 
reports, already in general circulation, though 
these several acts, in strictness of morality, 
and at the bar of conscience and of God, fol- 
low, for the most part the same rules which 
we have already laid down; still, in all other 
eases, the lines of distinction between slan- 
derous iind uHowahle utterance are so deli- 
cate, and the outward act. trorn which only 
the inward motive can be inferred, so neces- 
sarily equivocal, as scarcely to allow of bring- 
ing them within the limits of human decision. 

The man who wantonly fabricates and ob- 
trudes upon community, an injurious report 
against his neighbour, is both a liar and a 
slanderer. And he who, after that report is 
obtruded on community, and without enquir- 
ing after its truth or falsehood, wantonly con- 
veys it to regions which it had not reached, 
though not a liar, is a slanderer. 

But, after the injurious report is spread, 
and to the extent it is spread, to determine 
that it may not be enquired after, nor spoken 
of, would be a refinement on libels, which no 
prudent court, I should think, would be dis- 
posed to make; or, were it made, which no 
enlightened community would be disposed to 
submit to. 

For, to say nothing of the equal jeopardy 
in which it would place him, who enquired, 
or conversed, or gave his opinion to ascertain 
the truth, and him who did this to prevent its 



34 

Mr. Ches- ascertainment; him who did this to alleviate, 
t^L ^/ and him who did this to aggravate the scan- 
Modera- dal ; him who did this as matter of mere con- 
tor's ad- versation, and him who did it out of malice 
prepense ; to say nothing of this, a refinement 
on libels, that would absolutely shut out all 
discussion of topics where character was con- 
cerned ; would shut out with it, could it pre- 
vail, all that information concerning men 
and events, so necessary to the well-being, I 
had almost said the existence of society, and 
would end in that moral despotism over lib- 
erty of speech, which would be oppressive to 
many, injurious to the good, and favourable 
only to impostors, hypocrites, and knaves. 

I have thought it my duty to say thus much 
on this point, in entering on the trial. 

With respect to the charge of falsehood, it 
speaks for itself, and the nature of the offence 
is understood by every man who has been 
brought up in the church of Christ. If pro- 
ven it fixes a stain on the ministerial charac- 
ter, not indeed indelible, but which nothing 
but those tears which Peter shed, can wash 
away. 

Our first enquiry now is after truth ; and 
we ought, with the solemnitythat befits judg- 
es on character, more precious than property, 
or even than life, to examine candidly, faith- 
fully, and without favour or affection, to pro- 
nounce between this, our accused brother, 
and that christian public, to whom our judg- 
ment is to be returned. Till we have ascer- 
tained what is truth, and pronounced on it, 
our duty is judicial merely ; and we are not 
only not to conceal the truth ourselves, but 
as we expect to answer it to God, we are not 
to permit it to be perverted or concealed by 
others. This done, truth ascertained and 






declared, Ihe door of forgiveness in Chris's Mr ; JJg«- 
bouse is alw ivs open, and the offender, bow 
I soever his offence, may, by repentance 
and reformation, enter it." 

The moderator having resumed his seat, 
Mr. Chester addressed the court in the words 
following : 

•• I am anxious, iu my present circumstan- Mr. cbes- 
ck, to condncl that part of the trial that de- ^ r ' s s P iead " 
Yolvi-s upon me, in the spirit of meekness, 
ami in the temper of a disciple and a minis- 
ter of Ihe '• Prince of Peace." 1 have no fears 
of a personal kind respecting the result of 
this investigation. I am supported by the 
honest consciousness <>f innocence, by the 
foil persuasion, th t the exhibition of truth 
will promote my defence, and in the humble 
reliance upon Him who teaches bis followers 
in such an hour as this what they shall say. 

Mv defence lies in the simple truth, which 
J will assist to the utmost of my power, to 
brin^ before yon. There is no part of my 
conduct which 1 wish to shield, as it relates to 
the subject before you, but on the other hand 
I mi sincerely desirous to bring the truth to 
view, without colouring or disguise. The 
charges as they stand, are of a character to 
impeach the purity and involve the reputation 
of a minister of the go-pel. 

It will not be forgotten that charges are 
easily made. I am not conscious of having 
done wrong. Yet I am convinced that even 
in our best intentions, we are liable to error. 
We may be deceived both in our actions and 
the motives from which they spring. And if 
I have been left to be actuated by improper 
feelings, or if under the dominion of good 
feelings I have been left to improper conduct, 
I hope to have the fortitude to confess it, the 
4 



m 

Mi. t hes- principle to mourn for it, the virtue to repent 
^ I^i of it, and the christian magnanimity to make 
Mr. ches- every reparation in my power to the injured, 
ter's plead- the church and to the world. 

Before I proceed to reply specifically to the 
charges, I beg leave to present a very brief 
history of the concern I have had in the trans- 
actions which have placed me before you. 

When the Rev. Hooper dimming joined 
the presbytery of Albany, which was on the 
day of my installation in the Chapel-street 
church, I felt towards him nothing but good 
will, and a sincere desire to find in him, a 
friend and a brother. As far as was in my 
power I manifested in my conduct this dispo- 
sition of kindness. I freely expressed it to htm 
and to others. I was acquainted with his unfor- 
tunate history in Jersey, and on that account I 
really felt towards him more tenderness, and 
friendly solicitude, than I probably should 
have felt, under any other circumstances. 

The sabbath after the adjournment of 
presbytery, in February, 1816, he preached 
in Dr. Neill's church, and it was alleged by 
some of the most respectable persons of the 
congregation, that he had delivered two of 
Mr. Toplady's sermons, in the place of his 
own compositions. I could not doubt this 
fact, without questioning the veracity of some 
of the most honorable and spotless men in 
the city. I afterwards conversed with Dr. 
Neill upon this subject, after he had had an 
interview with Mr. Cumming. I understood 
Dr. Neill to say that Mr. Cumming had con- 
fessed his fault, and had declared that if it 
was thought proper for him to supply Dr. 
Neill's pulpit in his absence to Philadelphia, 
agreeable to the appointment of presbytery, 
he would go home, and write two sermons 



that would place him beyond the reach of Mr ; £. h . e '~ 

1 . . . , " ter's 1 rial. 

suspicion as a plagiarist. s^v^'' 

If the subject of Mr. Cumming's plagiar- M r . ches- 
ism or th it of any other man has been intro- ter's plead 
duced into company where I have been ; if I ' 
have said my thing, I may have spoken of 
the <ct as I trust I always shall do, with ab- 
horrence. 

I will never so far participate, in what ap- 
pears to me degrading to the ministerial char- 
acter, which strikes at the respectability and 
usefulness of my brethren, and which if ex- 
tensively practised would degrade the Amer- 
ican clergy, as not to bear my pointed testi- 
mony against it — I am not conscious of hav- 
ing advanced any opinion on this subject, 
which it was not my honor to entertain, and 
my duty under the circumstances to express. 

After Dr Neill left this city, 1 was sin- 
cerely anxious to avoid any interference with 
his congregation, that might appear imperti- 
nent on the one ham I, or to manifest any in- 
difference that should look unkind or un- 
friendly on the other. I could not but feel a 
deep interest in the concerns of a congrega- 
tion, which from its character and influence, 
was worthy of a respectful attention. Though 
I felt 1 had no right to be obtrusive, and was 
certain that I ought not to be indifferent to 
any thing that related to its order, respecta- 
bility or stedfastness. 

When it was rumoured that the Rev. Mr. 
Curaming was to be the successor of Dr. 
Neill, I was utterly aloof from any suspicion 
of wishing to prevent him. As far as I know 
our congregation had been prudent and si- 
lent. 

Though I had said very little to my most 
confidential friends in that congregation, still 



m 

Mr ; £ h . es " I bad expressed to my brethren of our session, 
mv deep solicitude for their welfare. At all 



ings 



Mr. hes- times I had avowed my disposition to serve 
-'<M>iead them to the extent of my power. I bad fre- 
quently enjoined tie duty of imploring- upon 
them the divine bl ssing, and iccording to 
my feeble ability I have endeavoured to per- 
form it. Until the occurrence, now to be 
mentioned, 1 had avoided every thing that at 
all interfered either with Mr. Gumming or 
the concerns of the first church. 

Three months had now elapsed since Dr. 
Neill was dismissed, and nearly nine since 
the rumour of the Toplady business, I do not 
think that any person can say, that 1 had 
said any thing of Mr. dimming, after the ex- 
citement of the February sermons had passed 
away. The transactions in which I am im- 
plicated would have been buried in the bosom 
of friendship, had not Dr. Neill left the city. 
From his going* away until about the first of 
November, I was in no way concerned with 
Mr. Cumming, anrl I never should have been, 
had not the circumstances occurred which I 
am now to relate. About this time Mr. Uriah 
Marvin, a member of our session and the 
friend of my confidence, a man whose sin- 
cerity is never questioned, and whose vera- 
city is unimpeachable, in whose family Mr. 
Cumming has been a frequent inmate, and 
who has received from him the most friendly 
hospitality, called upon me and said he wish- 
ed to ask my advice in a question of duty and 
of conscience. He told me th. t he and his 
family had come to the knowledge of facts, 
which he thought he was bound to reveal for 
the benefit of his friends in the old church. 

Mr. Marvin said that he had always been 
considered the friend of Mr. Cummins:. He 



29 

did wih him every blessing, he hoped he JJ^ ^.Jfjj" 
•roul be useful in tli«' churches, and outlive /^ ^.' 
his faults. But he was convinced that he was ,,,. „ e6 . 

not a proper man to have the charge of a !"*■ P le **" 
large congregation in this city. He then 
stated that be had become satisfied from long 

<c rvation, th it his family were convinced 
of the same f ct am 1 that it had been ob- 

d by some of Mr. Cumming's particular 
friends who had freely conversed with him 
on the same subject, that Mr. Cum ruing was 
in the habit of making very unadvised and 
improper use of ardent spirits — that he drank 
so much that he felt it his dut\ to put liquor 
beyond his reach, and th it sometimes he ap- 
peared so much affected with its use, that he 
bad prevented his going out in the evening, 
for fear that he should injure himself in the 
view of the world and wound the cause of 
the Redeemer, if he should be seen in his light 
and flighty situ tion. 

The question was, should he communicate 
these facts to the brethren of the old session; 

1 advised him not to do so, in the then pre- 
sent state of things, and added, that perhaps 
Mr. Cu ming would not be called, and that 
his saying any thing about it, would do more 
hurt than good; and here the conversation 
ended. 

The next time Mr. Marvin spoke on this 
subject, in my hearing, was before all the 
members of our session, when the same state- 
ment was substantially made, and we were 
requested to m^ke such a use of it as pru- 
dence and exigencies might dictate. 

I had come to the knowledge of these facts, 
entirely without solicitation or exertion on my 
part They came to me in a way to demand 
my attention. 



30 

Mr. dies- I could not escape from them ; they appear- 
vis!i e ^ to P omt 0llta P atn °^ P* am k ut painful du- 
Mr ches- ty- ' communicated them to one member of 
ter's plead- this presbytery in whose experience and judg- 
,DB9 * ment I had more confidence than in my own, 
and who gave me the same advice which X 
had given to Mr. Marvin. 

I had heard it mentioned, that conduct si- 
milar to that imputed to Mr. dimming at 
Mr. Marvin's, have occured in other places. 
I had ascertained from Mr Marvin himself, 
that he had repeatedly admonished Mr. dim- 
ming relative to those improprieties of con- 
duct, which he attributed to the improper and 
intemperate use of spiritons liquors, but to 
no purpose — under these circumstances I did 
wi h to unbosom myself to some confidential 
friend, and to have an interchange of infor- 
mation and opinion respecting the whole 
course of Mr. Cumming's conduct, for the 
regulation of my own duty in my future acts. 
It was with these views that the interview was 
held and the communication made to Mr. 
Tucker, in the retirement of the closet and 
in the confidence of friendship. With whom 
could I have made this interchange of opin- 
ion and information, with more propriety than 
with Mr. Tucker ? To whom could I have 
imparted what I had heard of Mr. Cumming, 
with more safety to Mr. Cumming, than to 
Mr. Tucker. He resided in Schenectady. He 
was a preacher of the gospel. He was my in- 
timate friend. I did it in confidence. If I was 
mistaken in judgment, I was not in motive. 
I am confident that it will not be shown, 
that I mentioned Mr. Marvin's communica- 
tion to any person but to those referred to 
above, until the thing had been made public 
by Mr. Cumming himself, after our interview 



31 

at Mr. Mutton's. All private expostulation *• £het- 
was at an end from that time. We were at .'^ ^J 
issue before the world. Mr. • hes- 

Things were in this situation when the tec's piead- 
presbytery were called to install Mr. Hovey l0SS ' 
at Milton On that occasion Mr. Cumming 
did preach not his own sermon, but the 
sermon of the Rev. Mr. Channing, of Boston, 
which 1 heard him preach at the ordination 
of the Rev. John Cod man, in Dorchester, 
December. 1808. The circumstances under 
which I heard that sermon, impressed it deep- 
ly on my mind. Since it has been printed, 
1 have often read it with attention. It is too 
striking to be forgotten. I immediately re- 
cognized, and was able, in many parts to an- 
ticipate Mr. Cumming, while he was reciting 
it, both in the turn of thought and expression. 

The charge that I have industriously cir- 
culated this report is not true, tho' it is true 
1 have mentioned it to those whom I thought, 
and still think had a right to know it. In 
this I have been actuated by motives which 
my own heart condemns not, and which I 
trust your hearts will not condemn. 

I am sure that I have never sought occa- 
sion to mention a circumstance so painful and 
degrading. If I shall be convinced that I 
have industriously circulated this report, I 
shall be convinced that I have done wrong, 
for I am well aware, that in the language of 
the charge, the report is injurious alike to the 
moral and ministerial character of the Rev. 
Hooper Cumming. I was acquainted with 
the fact that Mr. Cumming had been sus- 
pended from the ministry in New- Jersey, and 
had understood that his restoration had been 
founded on his most solemn promise, not to 
repeat the offence of preaching other men's 



Mr. Hies- se rmons in the place of his own. In men- 
J^^)* turning that he had preached Mr Channiitg's 
Mr. ti, - sermon I was not guilty of slander in any 
ter's plead- sense. The offence was of the most public 
nature, and required the most prompt and 
public exposure. 

The mode of treating: an offending brother 
as laid down by our Saviour, does not apply 
to public offences, but to those of a private, 
secret ch iracter, where the offence is sup- 
posed to be known onI> to the offending and 
the offended brother. Then to expose his 
fault without priv te expostulation and kind 
attempts to bring the offender to repentance, 
would be a violation of the law of love ; and 
the person who thus treated another, would be 
accountable as a slanderer. But where the 
offence is in its own nature public — where the 
injury is not on the limb but on the body — 
where it is committed in the most open man- 
ner, it is a proper subject of public animad- 
version. It looses every feature of a priv -te 
character and all its claim to forbearance, of 
course it is not a violation of any law of charity, 
to speak of it as I have done. 

I wa- not b« lancing rights but duties. I 
felt myself not only at liberty, but bound to 
mention an occurrence that fell under my own 
observation, to any Minister or Elder of this 
presbytery, who are pledged to watch over 
each other. Beside, I had reason to believe 
that this was by no means the first or a soli- 
tary instance of plagiarism, the same thing 
has been publickly charged in Albany and 
Schenectady. I did not in any view consider 
it as a private offence. Nor can I perceive 
how I violated any law of charity in the state- 
ment I have made of the fact. In the inter- 
view which I had with Mr. Cumming at Mr. 



as 

Hutton's. I understood him tosav that he had Mr ; *S 

_ _ „,, • ter's J rial. 

made a verv tree use ot Mr. Unarming s ser- 



monatMilton; that he had been induced todo Mr. thes- 
so from the pressure of ministerial duties, and ! e, ^ s i >lea(1 ' 
his consequent inability from want of time, to 
prepare himself for that occasion. At this 
interview, he promised he would not in future 
make the use he had done of other men's ser- 
mons ; that he would in future throw himself 
upon his own resources, that it was his fixed 
and unalterable purpose to do so, and re- 
quested me and the other gentlemen to state 
this resolution whenever we had opportunity. 
At the interview at Mr. Hutton's, Mr. Cum- 
ming -aid, Mr. Chester, Mr. Tucker told me 
that you told him, that Mr. Marvin told you 
that I was so drunk at his house, that he would 
not permit me to go out. I replied I never 
did tell Mr Tucker that you was drunk at 
Mr. Marvin's nor did I authorize him to pub- 
lish any thino- that I had said to him ; but if 
he felt himself at liberty to repeat any of my 
conversations, he had a right to understand 
me, that you were in an improper state from 
the unadvised use of liquor to wo abroad. 

I supposed at the time that Mr. Cumming 
had either mistaken or misrepresented Mr. 
Tucker's communication. I do not believe 
that it will appear in proof, that I have men- 
tioned this circumstance to any but those men- 
tioned, until after the conversation at Mr. 
Hutton's, and that my truth and consistency, 
from which I have never, I am persuaded, 
departed, will be confirmed by the testimony. 

I made substantially the same statement 
before the committee at Schenectady, but as 
I have had no access to the testimony from 
the committee, nor have I had any commu- 
nication from them on this subject ; I shall 



6* 

M '" tm rest m .vself until the witnesses are examined, 
^^^^ with the simple and unqualified denial of the 
Mr. ches- charges. I shall avail myself of all my wri- 
ter'? plead- vileges upon this subject I intend to pur- 
sue the charge of false- hood to its author or 
authors, and endeavour to rlevelope the truth. 
I stand before you charged by common fame, 
of an alleged crime said to be committed in a 
confidential examination, before members of 
this presbytery. Had I been guilty, no man 
had a right to expose me. The alleged 
fault was of the most secret character and en- 
titled to all the sacred regards of charity. It 
received none of them, and the first inti na- 
tion of error, which I received, was from the 
brazen trumpet of common fame. 

We come now to the history of the third 
presbyteri in congregation of the city of Al- 
bany. After that congregation was leg dly 
established, the trustees called upon me and 
requested me to preside in the meeting to be 
convened for the purpose of electing a pastor; 
I assured them of my readiness to serve them. 
I did preside and formed their papers as far 
as my agency was necessary. As to that so- 
ciety I have never interfered with it in word 
or deed. It was out of my power to be more 
obliging or respectful than I was to them. In 
the discharge of an official duty, I acted with- 
out any other responsibility than that which 
official integrity required. I endeavoured to 
act up to the spirit of our constitution, and in 
the spirit of a faithful minister. I had noth- 
ing to do with their choice, nor did I open 
my lips about it, either in or out of the meet- 
ing. From the trustees and all concerned I 
received kind and courteous treatment. The 



So 

upinion of their commissioners has been ex- Mr : J ies ." 

r ter's Trial. 

pressed to this presbytery, in their memorial , - ^ v ^/ 
laid oo the t iblc in February list. Mr. Ches- 

Notwithst inding ill th it is p ist, I think I ^ p,ead " 
can truly affirm th it I have not felt nor do I 
feel one emotion of mger or resentment to an 
individual of that congregation. I hope to 
show them th it I am above the littleness of 
envy, or the desire of revenge. That the 
only retaliation that I can exert is to do them 
good, and the only triumph that would grat- 
ify, woul I be to convince them that they have 
mistaken both my heart and my chancter. 

Of the commissioners i have nothing to 
say, but that two of them were entire strin- 
ger* to me, and with the third, I m lint lined, 
as far as related to myself acivil intercourse; 
th it I never have, nor do I now feel the 
slightest >pitit of hostility. 

As to the third congregation, th it I wish 
it mi^ht be built up in the purity and order of 
the gospel, and as far as my conduct could 
evince anything it has proved this; and sir, 
however it may he mistaken it will never 
evince any thing else. I -till wish them eve- 
ry blessing from the great head of the church ; 
my heart's desire and prayer to God for them 
is, that they may be saved. 

Thus brethren I hive endeavoured to give 
a concise but faithful, and to the best of my 
knowledge and belief, a true and fair state- 
ment of the concern I have had in the trans- 
actions, which have placed me at your bar. 

I am prepared for the investigation of what 
lies before us. Tho' I have not provoked it ; 
tholdo not think I merit the imputttion, still I 
neither fear nor shrink from any scrutiny. If 
my defence shall involve others, let it be re- 



30 

Mr : -} 1 ™: membered that I have been driven to the post 

ter's 1 rial. . r 

v^v-^ I occupy. 

Mr. Che?- Having made the foregoing brief but can- 
ter's plead- did statement, I have only to add specifically 
and in form the positions I deny, the positions 
I admit, and the precise grounds on which 
I mean, before this tribunal, to place my de- 
fence. 

1st. I deny having industriously circulated, 
if indeed lean be said to have circulated at 
all, a report of the Rev. H. dimming having 
preached at Milton, a sermon of the Rev. Mr. 
Channing. 

2d. I admit however that it has been my 
painful duty to assert, of my own knowledge, 
and to a few individuals, that fact ; and my 
defence is, that such was the nature, the pub- 
licity and aggravation of the offence from an- 
tecedent offences, confessions and promises, 
that it was incumbent on me as a christian 
and a minister, to assert what it is now incum- 
bent on me more publickly to repeat and to 
prove that the Rev. H.Cun*jming,did so preach, 
and in the presence of this judicature, a ser- 
mon of the Rev. Mr. Channing, to which he 
did not add one sentence, and of which he 
omitted only one member of a sentence; tho' 
it suited the occasion on which the sermon was 
origin illy preached, did not suit the occasion 
on which Mr. Gumming recited the same. 

3d. I deny that I have in terms charged 
the Rev. Hooper Cumming with unqualified 
intoxication, at the house of Mr. U. Marvin. 
4th. I admit that I have in confidential 
conversations and from good motives, told Mr. 
M. Tucker that Mr. U. Marvin had told me 
that he had seen Mr. Cumming at his house, 
in such a situation, as he supposed from the 
improper use of spiritous liquors, that he pre- 



1 



vented him from going- out, that he might not **£ £|£J" 
expose himself; and my defence for having v^y^> 
told Mr. Tucker this is the same as my de- Mr. ches- 
fence for now telling it to this presbytery ; J^' s s p,ead " 
1 believed it was true at the time ; I still be- 
lieve it true, and it has become my painful 
duty to prove before you that it is true. 

5th. 1 deny that I was ever to my knowl- 
edge, charged in the presence of 1. Hutton 
and V. Marvin, with having made an unquali- 
tied charge of intoxication against the Rev. 
H. Cumming at the house of U.Marvin, in 
the terms and form in which it stands charg- 
ed against me in this second charge : and of 
course, 

6th. I deny that when charged therewith in 
their presence, I ever to my knowledge deni- 
ed the same. 

7th. I however admit that the Rev. Hoop- 
er Cumming did ask me in the presence of 
those gentlemen, whether I had authorized 
Mr. M. Tucker to say that Mr. Marvin told 
me that Mr. Cumming was so drunk at his 
house, that he would not suffer him to go out. 

8th. I admit that I answered, that I had 
not authorized Mr. Tucker to state that Mr. 
Marvin told me that he was drunk at his 
house, which answer was strictly and literal- 
ly true, and not only true but kind, and the 
most kind which was within my power con- 
sistently with truth to make. 

9th. The allegation contained in this third 
charge, I absolutely deny. It is an utter 
falsehood, and a falsehood be the author of 
it who he may, for which there is no apolo- 
gy, because I not only did not make the de- 
claration imputed to me in this charge, but 
when interrogated by Mr. Cumming him- 
self, whether Mr. Marvin told me that Mr. 



38 

Mr. Che*- Gumming* was drunk at his house, 1 express- 
es^** '.Y in '' distinctly told Mr. Gumming in re- 
Mr 'Hi*, ply; that Mr. Marvin did not tell me that Mr. 
ter ' s P lead * dimming was drunk at his house, but that 
ingS ' he was in such a st >te there, that he did not 
like to have him seen by other people. 

I deeply and solemnly regret to he obliged 
to put my defence on a ground that involves 
the moral character of any man, especially 
of any minister. But my defence lies wholly 
in the truth ; I have no other defence that I 
can make ; I have not voluntarily placed my- 
self at your bar ; I hwe not intentionally 
done one act to produce that state of things 
which has placed me here. But since I am 
placed here under circumstances in which no 
option is left, J shall not shrink from thedu- 
tylam called to perform. Disavowing there- 
fore all technical distinctions, and declining 
to avail myself of any advantages that I might 
take of informality in the manner of proceed- 
ing, or of error in the matter of the charges 
tabled against me, I now put both the truth 
of all I have said touching the sever 1 sub- 
jects in question, and also the right I had as 
a man, a christi in and a minister, to say the 
same, at issue before this tribunal." 

Mr. Chester having concluded, the court 
proceeded to take the testimony under the 
respective charges. 

FIRST CHARGE. 

Common fame charges the Rev. John Ches- 
ist Charge. ^ er wtf j l ffo mc / us i nous circulation of reports 
injurious to the character of the Rev. Hooper 
Gumming, to wit: 

Preaching at Milton, on the 1 1 th Decem- 
ber, 1816, a sermon of the Rev. Mr. Chai- 
ning. 



39 

Examination of Dr. Nott, sworn on the JJ r ; s ?■*?■[ 
part of the prosecution. \^\s**> 

Com. Do you know that the Rev. John i esumony 
Chester has industriously circulated a report, i stc ° h n arge . 
of Mr. Curniiing's having preached a sermon 
of Mr. Channing, as charged in this first 
charge ? 

Wit I do not know that he has circulated 
such a report at all. He has said something 
to me on that subject of his own knowledge. 
The pi ice was my study ; the time, when he 
returned from the installation at Milton ; the 
substance that Mr. Camming had preached 
Mr. Channing's sermon, at Milton, through- 
out, except the close, a prayer, about which 
he was uncertain. He toid me, on being en- 
quired of, that he had made the communi- 
cation to some minister, I do not recollect 
who. He asked my advice on this subject, 
which was, not to say any thing concerning 
it, except, if he felt it his duty, to any mem- 
ber of presbytery. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Did not Mr. Chester, at the time he 
stated to you on his way from Milton to Al- 
bany, that Mr. dimming had preached Mr. 
Channing's sermon, substantially repeat the 
introduction and several other passages which 
he said were in Mr. Channing's sermon ? 

Wit. He did. 

Def. Have you since seen Mr. Channing's 
sermon, and, if you have, did it not contain 
what Mr. Chester had told you it did ? 

Wit. I have seen it. It did ; and one 
thing with regard to which Mr. Chester 
doubted, viz. the prayer, which I found in 
the sermon. 

Def. Do you know whether the common 
fame of Mr. Cumming's plagiarism has a 



40 

Mr. ches- foundation in truth, and if so, what is all 

ter's Trial. , , V- •■ o 

y^^j^ you know on the subject ? 

Testimony WF*f. I do not feel at liberty to answer. 

on Def. Did not Mr. dimming assert, before 

st ar 8 e> j{j e confifjgn^ai committee, that Mr. Chester 
admitted at the interview with I. Hutton and 
U. Marvin, that the Milton sermon contain- 
ed many things, or some things, that he had 
never heard before, or since ; and that he 
could prove that Mr. Chester admitted this, 
by two witnesses ? 

Wit. He did assert it. 

Examination of Dr. Hosack, sworn on 
the part of the prosecution 

Witness knew nothing concerning the first 
charge. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Did not Mr. dimming assert before 
the committee on Mr. Win ne's resolution, that 
Mr. Chester had admitted at the interview 
with Mr. Hutton and Mr. Marvin, that the 
Milton sermon contained many things, or 
some things that he had never heard before 
or since, and that he could prove that Mr. 
Chester admitted this, by two witnesses ? 

Wit 1 cannot be particular as to the 
words ; but that is the substance. 

Examination of I. Hutton, sworn on the 
part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing of the Rev. 
John Chester's having industriously circulat- 
ed a report of the Rev. Hooper Cumming's 
having preached a sermon of the Rev. Mr. 
Channing, as charged in the first charge ? 

Wit. I do not. 

Com. What did Mr. Cumming say to Mr. 
Chester, at the interview at your house, rel- 
ative to the Milton sermon ; and what did 



41 
Mr. Chester sav to Mr. Gumming on the same Mr ; ^ hei ' 

■ . , J ° ter's Trial. 

subject s^v-w 

Wit Mr. dimming said, brother Chester, Testimony 
I Understand that you have told in Schenecta- c °" 
dy that I have preached Mr. Channing's ser- 
mon at Milton ; and I think you ought to 
have told it to inc. Mr. Chester said he 
thought the offence of that nature, that it did 
not require a private communication. Mr. 
dimming said something that implied a de- 
nial of having preached Mr. Channing's ser- 
mon ; Mr Chester asked Mr. dimming if he 
pretended to deny having preached that ser- 
mon at Milton ; Mr. dimming neither de- 
nied it nor confessed it ; Mr. Chester ex- 
pressed regret of this affair, expressing his 
friendship to him when he joined this pres- 
bytery. 

Com. Who were present at that interview ? 

Wit Mr. Marvin, Mr. Chester, Mr. Gum- 
ming, and none else. 

Dtf. Did not Mr. Chester maintain thro'- 
out the interview, in your presence and Mr. 
Marvin's, that the entire sermon preached by 
Mr. Cumrning at Milton, was from Mr. Chan- 
ning's, in thought, arrangement, and ex- 
pression ? 

Wit. That was the fact. He did main- 
tain it ; and though he could not vouch for 
<; ifs" or " ands," Mr. Chester said it was an 
exact copy of the sermon, with an exception, 
whether in the introduction or application, I 
do not recollect. 

Dp/. Did Mr. Chester admit, during 
that interview, that the introduction of Mr. 
Cumming's sermon was not the same as Mr. 
Channing's, and that Mr. Cumming's ser- 
mon contained many things, or some things, 
that he had never heard before or since ? 
6 



4$ 

term's TriaT ^' ' keard notmn £ of tnat kmd * 

v^y^ />e/" Did Mr. Chester acknowledge at thai 
TePtiojony interview, that he had been mistaken, orim- 
(1 ° n prudent in asserting that Mr. Ciimming's 

1st Charge, r e* - © 

sermon was the same as Mr. Channing's, and 
that he would contradict the report ? 
FF*£ I never heard that asserted. 
ZJf/". Did not Mr. dimming declare, thit 
he had made up his mind, henceforth to 
throw himself upon his own resources, and 
no longer make the use he had done of other 
people's sermons ? And was this determina- 
tion what he wished Mr. Chester, Mr. Mar- 
vin, and yourself tost ate, whenever you had 
an opportunity ? 

Wit. That was the substance. 
As Mr. Hutton was dismissed, Mr. dim- 
Mr. Cum- ming appeared in presbytery and stated, that 
"iSmST ne ntic * ^ een unavoidably prevented from ap- 
the pro- pearing sooner. That he supposed presby- 
ceedmgs. tery were sitting with closed doors. That he 
had been providentially informed that they 
were suffering his character to be public kl y 
assailed, and he had come to claim his seat 
as a member, and to demand that the pro- 
ceedings be arrested, and that the moderator 
give him a statement of all that had been 
done since the opening of presbytery until 
that time 

The moderator declined doing this himself., 

but decided that the clerk should read, to 

Mr. Cum ming, the testimony taken. 

This decision was objected to on the ground, 

Uetermin- tnat ^[ r Cu in ming was himself cited as a 

ation or & 

the Court, witness, and could not, according to the con- 
stitution, hear the previous testimony, until 
he had himself been sworn. The objection 
was deemed insurmountable by the modera- 
tor, who therefore reversed his decision, giv- 



43 



Ches- 

..ii 



1112: it, however, as his opinion that the request Wr ; ^ h 

...... . [ .1 ter'a 1 1 

ot Mr. C ummiD«rousrnt to be granted as soon >^^ 
as it could be constitution II y done. 1st charge 

Mr. Camming then stated that he ought 
to be forthwith called as a witness. Here the 
moderator interrupted Mr. Camming, to re- 
in uk, that as presbytery were now sitting- 
juridically, all debate was prohibited by the 
rules of order previously adopted, except at 
an interlocutory meeting. Considering- how- 
ever Mr. Cn mining's peculiar situation, it was 
his opinion that he should he allowed to pro- 
ceed, and he hoped the court would acquiesce 
in that opinion. Mr. Cumming proceeded to 
state, th it it was very important to his cha- 
racter, to be present during Mr. Marvin's ex- 
amination ; that he hid not hid opportunity 
of cross-ex a min in«>- the preceding witnesses, 
and wished, in the case of Mr. Marvin, to 
avail himself of th it privilege. 

Mr Hutton on the p rt of the committee „ 
lor conducting the prosecution, stated, tn.it in why Mr. 
arranging the witnesses, whose names li id c "" 1 """. 1: - 

OS ... , cannot be 

been furnished them in this cause, they had called as a 
placed Doct. Nbtt first, because he was mode- »•«»»«■ be- 

r fore his 

rator; Doct. Hosack next, bee <use he was a lum , 
member of presbytery; that his own name 
had been placed next, because he was on the 
committee for conducting the prosecution; 
and that Mr. Marvin h id been placed next, 
because they were present together at the in- 
terview alluded to in the prosecution ; and it 
was supposed, that their testimony would be 
better understood, if they were examined in 
succession. Next to Mr. Marvin, they had 
pUced Mr. Cumming, making him the fifth 
witness, instead of the ninth, as he stood in 
the list of witnesses, furnished by Messrs. Ea- 
ton, Graham and Lucas, Mr. Cumming's 



44 

Mr. Ches- comm i ss k> ne rs. He could have wished, that 
^^'Mr Gumming should have been present at 
1st Charge, the opening of the trial. He knew no reason 
why he had not been; he supposed, at the 
time, Mr. Cumming remained absent out of 
delicacy; but, whatever the cause might have 
been, the committee had done nothing to de- 
lay his appearance in presbUery. 

A motion was then made, by a member of 
the court, that Mr. Cumming be (in place of 
Mr. Marvin) forthwith called as a witness. 

Mr. Chester objected to the admission of 
Mr. Cumming, in the words following: 
" I feel myself constrained to object to the 
The accuc. admission of Mr. Cumming, as a witness. 
to M J r eC S My objection lies against his competency. 
Cumming, He has a direct and palpable interest in the 
tere"ted" issue of this investigation. My acquittal is 
witness, his condemnation, and your record is the best 
testimony that can be adduced against him. 
If he shall be admitted to testify, he becomes 
not only a witness against me, but for him- 
self. It is virtually his cause. His interest 
is of the deepest personal character." 

In connection with this objection, an eccle- 
siastical authority was read in the words fol- 
lowing : 

" Accusers, persons of infamous charac- 
acter, at enmity with the accused, under cen- 
sure, or process for censure, who expect, di- 
rectly or indirectly, to reap any temporal ad- 
vantage, or to avoid any temporal disadvan- 
tage, by giving testimony, cannot be admit- 
ted as witnesses, either for or against an of- 
fender. On any of these grounds, he has a 
right to challenge a witness, and the judica- 
tory is candidly to hear and to decide on his 
exceptions." 

The moderator stated, that he should re- 



4© 

gtet to have Mr. Cumming's testimony ex- **£ J* es - 

eluded, on the ground of incompetency, as v^^^„ 
made out by Mr. Chester, that his oxen acquit- istchorge. 
tal would he Mr. Cunt thing's condemnation. Q . 

AJ r Gumming was, indeed, charged in this the Mod- 
court for plagiarism, and to be hereafter tried. eratoT - 
Mr. Chester was now on trial, for slandering 
Mr. Camming; for having- reported that he 
was. in a particular instance, guilty of pla- 
giarism. Mr. Chester has plead, that he 
should give the truth in evidence ; which plea 
might indeed, (by putting at issue an act of 
Mr. dimming, for which he was held to trial) 
give him an interest in the issue of this cause. 

Still, however, (laying that charge out of 
the account, and also the third charge, in the 
bringing of which Mr. Cum minor rnight have 
taken an agency, that would render his com- 
petency doubtful) there was yet another 
charge against Mr. Chester, in the issue of 
which Mr. Cumming's interest was not of that 
kind, that necessarily rendered him incom- 
petent. 

Mr. Cumming had not been charged in this 
court, with intemperance. Mr. Chester was 
now under trial for slandering him in that res- 
pect; but the public and not Mr. Cumming, 
was the prosecutor on record. In strictness 
of law, therefore, so far as interest was con- 
cerned, he was not convinced that Mr. Cum- 
ming might not, on thatcharge,be admitted. 
On the whole, the moderator wished the tak- 
ing of Mr. Marvin's testimony, together with 
the question of Mr. Cumming's competency, 
might be postponed for further consideration. 

The postponement suggested, not being 
agreed to, the moderator said he should wave, 
for the present, deciding how far the objec- 
tion of Mr. Chester, to the competency of Mr. 



46 

Mr ; tI-h" humming, ought to be sustained, in the hope 
vl^v^*' * nat the objection itself, might be withrir wn. 
iBt charge. Considering, however, the facts within his 
ra own knowledge, and the testimony which, if 
tor's opin- the question could have been postponed, it 
ion, Wi s intended, previously to its decision, to 

have presented to the court, there was an ob- 
jection, in his own breast, to the administer- 
ing of an oath to Mr. dimming, which he 
believed it to be his duty to disclose. The 
objection was this: he doubted his sanity. 
He did not mean to insinuate, that he believ- 
ed him uniformly deranged , but it was his 
prevailing belief, that he was occasionally, 
and at present, partially so. 

He was aware of the responsibility he took, 
in giving this intimation, at this time. He 
did not doubt, however, that it would ulti- 
mately be believed, to have been both proba- 
ble and ch writable. In the mean time, he did 
not wish the court, (if they saw nothing in 
Mr. Cumming, to confirm the opinion of the 
moderator,) to be governed by it. Having 
made the suggestion, he had satisfied his con- 
science. 
Mr. dies- The objection of Mr. Chester being renew- 
ter'sobjec- ed, was sust ined ; and Mr. Cummin g's tes- 
tained. 9 "' timony was rejected, by a vote of presbytery, 
on the ground of incompetency. 

Examination of Mr. Marvin, sworn on 
the part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing of the Rev. 
John Chester's having industriously circulat- 
ed a report, of the Rev. Hooper Cumming 
having preached a sermon of Mr. Channing's, 
as charged in this first charge ? 

Wit. I dont know that I ever heard him 
name it. 

Com. What did Mr. Cumming say to Mr. 



4A 

Chester, at the interview at Mr. Hutton's, j*i% Ch*. 
relative to the Milton sern <>n, and what did v^. l^J 
Mi. Chester say to Mr. Cumming on the lstchargc. 
same subject ! t • 

)\t? Mr. Cumming said, I understand you 
said, 1 preached Mr Channing's sermon at 
Milton. Mr. Chester said, I did say so Mr. 
Camming says, do you say I did it verbatim ? 
Mr Chester said, as nearly as I can recollect, 
for I have a very great reason to know that 
sermon. 

Mr. Cumming. Did not Mr. Chester say 
to Mr. Cumming, at the interview at Mr. 
Hutton's, either that there were some, or se- 
veral, or many things in the discourse preach- 
ed at Milton, which he had never before nor 
since read or heard ! 

Wit. I never he ird any such conversation. 

Cum. Are you sure, perfectly sure of that ? 

Wit. I never heard any such thing, to my 
knowledge. 

D(f. Did Mr. Chester acknowledge, at 
that interview, that he had been mistaken, 
or imprudent in asserting that Mr. Cumming's 
sermon was the same as Mr. Channing's, and 
that he would contradict the report ! 

Wit. I never heard any such thing. 

Examination of Mr. Backus, sworn on 
the part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing of Mr. Ches- 
ter's having industriously circulated a report, 
of the Rev H. Cumming's having preached 
a sermon of Mr. Channing, as charged in 
this first charge ? 

Wit. I do not. I heard him say that Mr. 
Cumming preached Mr. Channing's sermon 
at Milton ; I believe subsequent to the inter- 
view at Mr. Hutton's house. 



4$ 
Mr. ches- Examination of Mr. Whine, sworn on the 

ter's Trial. . f ,, J .. 

part or the prosecution. 



1st Charge. Corn. Do you know any thing of the Rev. 
John Chester having industriously circulated 
estimony. a re p 0rt f t ne R ev Hooper Cumming's hav- 
ing preached a sermon of Mr. Channing's, as 
charged in this first charge ? 

Wit. I do not. He did tell me that he did 
hear Mr. dimming preach Mr. Channing's 
sermon at Milton, as nearly as he could re- 
collect. 

Examination of Mr. Boardman, sworn on 
the part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing of the Rev. 
John Chester's having industriously circulat- 
ed areport, of the Rev. Mr. Cumming's hav- 
ing preached a sermon of Mr. Channing's, as 
charged in this first charge ? 

Wit. I do not. I heard him say in his stu- 
dy, that Mr. dimming had preached Mr. 
Channing's sermon at Milton, and that he 
had the sermon in print. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Did you feel that it was a confiden- 
tial communication ? 

Wit. I did. 

Examination of Mark Tucker, sworn on 
the part of the prosecution.* 

Com. Do you know that the Rev. John 
Chester, has industriously circulated areport, 
of Mr. Cumming's having preached a sermon 

* When Mr. Tucker was called, the question of his 
competency was suggested by a member of the court, he 
being also, as well as Mr. dimming, under process for 
trial. The moderator said, if Mr. Tucker had any in- 
terest in the cause, it was to exculpate himself, in anti- 
cipation, by inculpating Mr. Chester. If, therefore, the 
objection was made, it ought to be considered, Mr. Ches- 
ter made no objection. 



49 

of Mr. Channing's, as charged in this first ? Ir ; £ h . es " 

. o 7 © ter's I rial. 

cn.irge? 



Wit. No, Sir. 1st Charge. 

Com. Did Mr. Chester tell you of his own Testimony: 
knowledge, any thing concerning Mr. Cum- 
mings having preached Mr. Channing's ser- 
mon at Milton ; if so, when, where, and what 
did he tell you ? 

Wit. He told me. that the sermon Mr. 
Cu aiming preached, was, in his opinion, Mr. 
Channing's sermon. This was before we 
reached Schenectady, on our way from the 
installation at Milton. 

Gross Examination. 

Dtf. Did you hear Mr. Cumming preach 
at Milton? 

Wit. I did. 

Def. Did you ever see that sermon in print; 
and if so, who was the author? 
1st Clause. I did. 
2d Clause. Mr. Channing. 

Examination of Hon. Smith Thompson, Hon. Smith 
sworn on the part of the prosecution. SSy" 

Com. Do you know any thing of the Rev. 
John Chester's having industriously circulat- 
ed a report, of the Rev. Hooper Cu mining's 
having preached a sermon of Mr. Channing's, 
as charged in this first charge '? 

Wit. I never, to my recollection, heard Mr. 
Chester say a syllable on the subject. 

Examination of Chancellor Kent, sworn on chancellor 
the part of the prosecution. 5iony. teS " 

Com. Do you know any thing of this first 
charge ; if so, what do you know ? 

(lit. I believe I have heard Mr.Chester say, 
that Mr. Cumming did preach Mr. Channing's 
sermon at Milton ? 

7 



Wit. | 



50 

W ? Trial Cross Examination. 

Def. Under what circumstances was this 



1st Charge, assertion made ? 

Testimon W ^' ' don't recollect the particular circum- 

' stances. 
c.R.Web- Examination of C. R. Webster, sworn on 
mon tesU *^e P art °^ tne prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 

this first charge ; and if so, what do you know? 

Wit. I know nothing as coming from Mr. 

Chester. 

Th.v. w. Examination of Th. V. TV. Graham, sworn 

feslTny. on * he P a J* of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this first charge ; and if so, what do you know? 

Wit. I know nothing. 
son's tes'ti- Examination of Mr. Johnson, sworn on the 
mony. part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know that the Rev. John 
Chester has industriously circulated a report, 
of the Rev. Hooper Cumming having; preach- 
ed a sermon of Mr. Channing, at Milton, as 
charged in this first charge ? 

Wit. I do not. 

Com. Did Mr. Chester tell you of his own 
knowledge, any thing concerning the sermon 
Mr. Cumming preached at Milton ; if so, 
when, where, and what did he tell you ? 

Wit. I don't recollect. 
Smith's tea- Examination of 3 lajor I. Smith, sworn on 
tioiony. the part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this first charge ; if so, what do you know ? 

If it No, sir. 

Mr. Cumming then moved that Majoi 
Smith be permitted to state, any thing he had 
heard Mr. Chester say. relative to Mr. Cum- 
tiling's plagiarism. This motion was object- 
ed to As, however, what Mr, Chester had 



51 
said, might go to show his prevailing tem- Mr £h«- 

° i % r /~i • i.u i ter's Trial. 

per toward Mr. dimming, the moderator s^^v^ 
thought it might be heard. The objection i s t charge. 
was therefore withdrawn. 

Mr. dimming. Have yon heard Mr Ches- 
ter say any thing prejudicial to my moral 
character, touching either of the points at is- 
sue ; if so, when, where, and what ? 

Wit. No. What I heard Mr. Chester say, 
was in reference to the Toplady sermon, at 
Doct. Willard's. Some one appealed to Mr. 
Chester, and asked whether he supposed 
there was any doubt on that subject. He 
considered there was none ; and when asked 
if he considered it a crime, he replied, the 
same as if any person should take papers 
from his desk. 

Cross Examination. 
Def. Was not my opinion hypothetical!^' 
.stated 1 
Wit. It was. 

Examination of Doct. Willard, sworn on Doct. wn 
the part of the prosecution. Iard ' 8 te sti- 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning mony " 
the first charge ? 

Wit. I know nothing. 

Examination of Mr. Eights, sworn on the E2££ 
part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this first charge ? 
Wit. I do not. 

Examination of Mr. Bulkley, sworn on the Mr. Buik- 
part of the prosecution. S„ 8 y . testi " 

Com. Do you know any thing of the Rev. 
John Chester, having industriously circulated 
a report of the Rev. Hooper Cumming having 
preached a sermon of Mr. Channing's, as 
charged in this first charge ? 

Wit. I do not. He did tell me at his study, 



5<2 

Mr. Ches- that Mr. Cumming did preach Mr. Channing's 

\*^s*J sermon. 

1st Charge. Cross Examination. 

Def. Was not my communication respect- 
es imony. .^ ^ e sermon, confidential ? 

Wit. It was. 
Mr. War- Examination nf Mr. Warren, sworn on the 
ren's testi- p ar t f the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this first charge ; if so, what do you know ? 

Wit. I don't know as to that particular ser- 
mon ; the conversation was on Mr. Cumming's 
preaching other people's sermons, generally. 

Mr. Cumming. Did you ever hear Mr. Ches- 
ter stile Mr. Cumming's conduct, as relating 
to either of the points at issue, infamous ? 

Wit. I do not distinctly recollect the word 
infamous. 

Mr. Cum. What did you hear Mr. Chester 
say, concerning Mr. Cumming's plagiarism'? 

To this Mr. Chester objected. 

As the answer might go to show the feel- 
ings of Mr. Chester, towards Mr. Cumming, 
the moderator was rather in favour of its be- 
ing put. After which, Mr. Chester withdrew 
his objection, and put the question himself. 

Mr. Chester. What did you ever hear Mr. 
Chester say, concerning Mr. Cumming's pla- 
giarism ? 

[\ it. The conversation was at Schenecta- 
dy, at Mr. Givens' : when some one asked, 
if it would not have been more christian, if 
those reports were true, for Mr. Chester to 
have told Mr. Cumming. Mr. Chester said, 
as Mr. Cumming made no bones in preach- 
ing other people's sermons, he should make 
no bones in making it public. Mr. Chester 
observed further, that he considered Mr. Cum- 
ming's character, in that respect, so notorious, 



53 

that he did not consider it his duty, nor the Jj£ g j^ 
dntv of any one else, to keep it private. I ,^ v ^J 
think this was on the next morning after Mr. 1st Charge. 
Winne's resolution had been handed to the T ti 
presbytery. This was a general conversation. 

Mr. Cum. Did the conversation arise in 
Consequence of the subject having been bro't 
up in presbytery? 

/ it. I cant say, that I was in the room 
when it commenced. 

Mr. Cum. Did Mr. Chester begin the con- 
versation i 

Wit. 1 can't tell; I think not. 

Mr. Cum. Did not Mr. Chester speak of 
Mr. Camming, in reference to alledged pla- 
giarism, while in conversation with you and 
others, at Schenectady, in a manner which 
indicated ho- til ity towards Mr. dimming; if 
so, what did he say ? 

Jl it. He said nothing more than what I 
previously said, in answer to the former ques- 
tions. 

Mr. Cum. Did Mr. Chester say any thing 
relative to pillaging a piece of broad cloth; 
if so, what did he say? 

Wit. Not in my hearing. 

Cross Examination. 

Def Did you ever hear of Mr. Cumming's 
plagiarism, before the conversation at Mr. 
Givens'? 

Wit. Yes. sir. 

Def. Was not Mr. Cumming's plagiarism 
notorious, before this conversation ? 

Wit. I did not conceive it so; it was fre- 
quently talked of, I know. 

Examination of Gilbert Stewart, sworn on Mr. stew- 
the part of the prosecution. ^' n s te8tl " 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this first charge? 



54) 

fer's Trial! Wit I d ° nt kll0W ^ tnU1 &' 

,^ ^J> Examination of Mr. I. T. B. Graham, 
1st charge, sworn on the part of the defendant. 
Testimony. Def. Did you not, on Tuesday, the first day 
of the session of the presbytery in Schenecta- 
ham's'tesu- ^ m February last, present to the presbyte- 
mony. r y of Albany, a memorial, in which you spoke 
respectfully of the Rev. John Chester? 

Wit. I did, sir.. 

Def. What transpired between Tuesday 
and Friday, that induced you to sign an in- 
formation against the Rev. John Chester, of 
whom you had spoken respectfully on the 
Tuesday preceding ? 

Wit. Common rumour, that Mr. Chester 
had been engaged, in industriously circulat- 
ing reports against Mr. Cumraing. 

Def Did you hear these rumours before, 
or after signing the memorial ? 

Wit. Both before and after. 

Def. When was it finally settled, and by 
whom, that an information against Mr. Ches- 
ter, should be presented? 

Wit. It was settled between us, the com- 
missioners, on the morning of its presentation 
to presbytery, at Schenectady. Mr. Cum- 
ming had no agency in the business : it was 
several members of the congregation, that 
pressed upon us. 

Def. Did you understand, that any of the 
third presbyterian congregation of Albany, 
had any deliberations, or gave any advice on 
the subject of my presentment ; if so, who 
informed you of it, and what was the amount 
of the conversation ? 

Wit. There were certain members of the 
congregation, that advised it. 

fUf Who first informed you, that Mr. 
Chester had stated before the committee. 



55 

on Mr. Winne's resolution, in Schenectady, J)£ 9 .JjJJJ" 
what was not true, relative to what Mr. Mar- v^y^' 
vin had told him, which has since been the ist charge. 
ground of an additional charge of falsehood? ~ tm „ 

pft£ 1 am uncertain. 

Cross Examination. 

Mr. Cum. On what was the compliment 
passed upon Mr. Chester, in the first memo- 
rial, predicated? 

M it. I believe it was in consequence of his 
assisting in moderating the call, and his pro- 
fessions of friendship to the third congrega- 
tion, in relation to the settlement of Mr. 
Gumming, as their pastor. 

Mr Cum. Why did you alter your mind 
respecting Mr. Chester? 

U it. It was in consequence of the course of 
proceeding he took in presbytery. 

Examination of Mr. Lucas, sworn on the Mr. Lucas' 
part of the defendant. testimony 

About the first of January I learnt that 
Mr. Marvin and dimming had been at Mr. 
Duncan's house Anxious to know the ob- 
ject of their call, Messrs. Duncan and Lu- 
cas called on Mr. Marvin, the same even- 
ing. Mr. Marvin said the object of the visit 
was, that the conversation at Mr. Hutton's 
the same day, should be related to us. That 
Mr Gumming requested Mr. Marvin to relate 
it to us, as he could not see us. Mr. Marvin 
said, the subject of Mr. Cumming's preaching 
a sermon at Milton came up ; that Mr. Cum- 
ining asked Mr! Chester if he had told that Mr. 
Gumming had preached Mr. Channing's ser- 
mon at Milton. Mr. Chester replied, do you 
deny having preached it? Mr. Cumming 
said, that he had read various authors, among 
them Mr. Channing ; that he then arranged 
his ideas and preached a sermon. Mr. Mar- 
vin stated, that Mr, Gumming said, what- 



56 

M £ ^j*" ever I had in that sermon, you know better 
y^^/^ than I do. Mr. Chester said, he considered 
1st charge, the greater part of it to be that sermon. 
Testimony. The defendant produced the records of the 
presbytery of Jersey, certified by the proper 
The accus- officer, and claimed to read the same in evi- 

ed claims j 

to read dence. 

minutes of The moderator said, he had not understood 

presbyufry. that those records were to be introduced as 
evidence in this ciuse The defendant re- 
plied, that he had cited them, and notified the 
committee, on the part of the prosecution, of 
the fact. And that he claimed to read the 
same in evidence, to make out his plea, to 
wit: "Thit such was the aggravation of 
Mr. Cum ming's offence at Milton, from an- 
tecedent offences, confessions, and promises, 
that it was incumbent on me, as a christian, 
and a minister, to assert what I did assert re- 
lating to Mr. Curarning's having preached 
Mr. Channing's sermon." It was therefore 

He IS P er " decided by the court that the defendant should 
be allowed to read the record which he had 
produced in evidence. 

The moderator said, it was not competent, 
to the defended, to make any selection. If 
any part of the record was read, the whole 
of it must be read, or the court would not be 
able to judge either of the relevancy, or the 
weight of the evidence it contained. 

J 1 !-""* 68 ° f Presbytery of Jersey, at Newark, Thursday, April 

presbytery * 9th > 1813 « , 

read in ev- " Mr. Hillyer stated to the presbytery, that common 
idence. fame charges a minister of this body with a course of de- 
liberate falsehood ; whereupon, Resolved, that Mr. Hill- 
yer, Mr. Williams, and Mr. Armstrong, Ministers, and 
Mr. Benjamin Cory, and Mr. Jacob Bennet, Elders, be 
a committee to inquire into the nature of the rumours, 
and report to the presbytery." 

A true extract from the minutes. 

THOMAS PICTON. 



51 

Presbytery of Jsrset, at Orange, Wednesday, June Mr. Ches- 
9th, 1813. ter '» Tria l- 

The committee appointed by presbytery of Jersey, ^^^/^^ 
on the representation of Mr. Hillver, to inquire into the lstCharge. 
source and nature of a report now circulating, which 
charges one of the ministers in the said presbytery, with j e J.g" es ° 
being guilty of deliberate falsehood, met according to p re9 {)ytery 
appointment, on Thursday, the '29th of April, 1813. read inev- 
Fresont, Mr. Hillver, Mr. Williams, and Mr. Armstrong, idence. 
Ministers, and Mr. Benjamin Cory, and Mr. Jacob Bon- 
nel, Elders. 

Mi. Hillver was chosen chairman, and Mr. Arm- 
strong, clerk. 

After Mr. Hillver had stated to the committee, the 
occasion and grounds of his asking for the appointment 
of this committee, it was agreed that the committee 
should meet on Monday, the 10th of May next, at 3 
o'clock, P. M. at Mr. Williams' in Springfield, to attend 
to this matter, and the chairman was directed to request 
the Rev. Mr. Spring, of New-York, the Rev. Mr. Rich- 
ards, the Rev. Mr. Whelpley, the Rev. Mr. Cumming, 
and Mr. Joseph C. Hornblower, and Mr. John R.Crane, 
of Newark, to attend at that time and place, that the 
committee may have opportunity to converse with them 
on that subject. 

"The clerk was directed to furnish an attested copy 
of these minutes, to the person whose character is im- 
plicated in the above-named reports. 
(Signed bi/J 

A. ARMSTRONG, Clerk. 

Springfield, May 10th, 1813, 3 o'clock, p. m. 

The committee met according to agreement, and be- 
gan with prayer, all the members being present. 

The committee conversed with the Rev. Mr. Rich- 
ards, the Rev. Mr. Whelpley, the Rev. Mr. Cumming, 
Mr. John R. Crane, and Mr. Joseph C. Hornblower, on 
the subject for the investigation of which they were ap- 
pointed ; and on the issue, there appeared reason to be- 
lieve, that the Rev. Hooper Cumming, a member of the 
presbytery of Jersey, has, in repeated instances, been 
guilty of deliberate falsehood, in which he has persisted 
with aggravating circumstances of guilt : and although. 
Mr. Cumming:, when the committee came to converse 
■with him, acknowledged, and seemed deeply to lament 
his sin, in some of the instances which had been men- 
tioned to the committee ; yet, as there were other in- 
stances in which there appeared reason to fear he had 
been equally guilty : and, as the committee were in* 
8 



5S 

3Ir. Cbes- formed, that reports do prevail, and have considerable 
ter's Trial, currency, in Newark and New-York, and in some oth- 
^^^^^ er places, imputing to Mr. dimming, a course of pre- 
lst Charge, varication and falsehood concerning the making use of 
other men's compositions in his sermons, and with con- 
Jersey 68 ° tradictory sayings about his purposing to leave his pre- 
presbytery sen ^ charge in Newark, and with prevarication and 
read in ev- falsehood in the business of receiving Dr. Ward, from 
Idence. Bloomfield, to be a member of his church ; and in re- 
plying to a charge of his having said, that he never had 
supposed Mr. David D. Crane to be possessed of true 
religion : the committee considering the heinous nature 
of the crimes thus imputed to him ; the circumstances 
of aggravation said to have attended them, and the ex- 
tent to which the ministerial character and the cause of 
religion are affected by these things, were unanimously 
of opinion that the presbytery ought to be called togeth- 
er as soon as practicable, and this whole business laid 
before them for their consideration and decision. 

In bringing this matter before the presbytery, the 
committee beg leave to refer them, for more particular 
information, and for evidence, to the following persons, 
viz. the Rev. Mr. Spring, of New-York ; the Rev. Mr. 
Richards, of Newark ; the Rev. Mr. Guildersleeve, of 
Bloomfield ; the Rev. Mr. Williams, of Springfield ; 
Mr. John R. Crane, Mr. Joseph C.Hornblower, Mr. Ste- 
phen Hays, jun. the wife of Mr. Alpheus Hughes, and 
Mrs. Skillman, of Newark. 

The above is respectfully submitted, by order of the 
committee. (Signed.) 

ASA HILLYER, Chairman. 

The presbytery, after deliberately considering the 
above report, appointed Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Picton,and 
Mr. Bonnel, a committee to make out a statement of 
the charges therein implied. 

The committee appointed to make out a statement of 
the charges against the Rev. Hooper Cumming, report 
the following, viz. 

I. That he has been guilty of a course of prevarica- 
tion and falsehood, concerning his making use of other 
men's compositions in his sermons. 

Witnesses. Rev. Gardner Spring, Rev. James Rich- 
ards, Rev. Gershom Williams, Rev. Samuel Whelpley, 
Mr. Joseph C. Hornblower, and Mr. John R. Crane. 

II. That he has been guilty of contradictory sayings 
about his purposing to leave his present charge in New- 
ark. 

Witnesses. Mrs. Skillman, Rev. Gershom Williams, 
Rev. Gardner Spring, and Rev. Stephen Thompson. 



59 

III. That lie has been guilty of prevarication and Mr. Ches- 
falsehood, in the business of receiving Doct. John Ward, ter ' s _ / 
from Rloomfield, to be a member of his church. >^^/^*r 

Witnesses. Col. John Dodd, Rev. Cyrus Guilder- ^t Charge, 
sleeve, Mr. Israel Crane, and Rev. James Richards. __. » 

IV. That he has been guilty of falsehood, in deny- j ersey 
ing that he never supposed Mr. David D. Crane had presbytery 
any religion. read in ev- 

'ff'itnesses. Mr. John R. Crane, and Mr. Alpheus idence. 
Hughes. 

V. That after having confessed his crime, in relation 
to the first article of these charges, and professed the 
deepest penitence, and the most solemn purpose of re- 
formation, he did, the same week, in disregard of his 
professions, and promise of reformation, repeat his of- 
fence, in preaching other men's sermons, and represent- 
ing them in private conversation, as his own. 

Witnesses. Rev. Stephen Thompson, Rev. James 
Richards, Rev. Gardner Spring, and Rev. Geshom Wil- 
liams. (Signed) 

AMZi STRONG, Chairman. 

Orange, June 9th, 1813. 

Resolved, That the above report be accepted, and that 
Mr. Cummingbe prosecuted on the above charges. 

Mr. dimming, being present, and a copy of these 
charges put into his hands, was asked, whether he was 
now prepared to proceed to trial, to which he answered 
in the affirmative. 

Mr. Cumming replied to each charge. But, though 
he acknowledged the truth of some of them, in part, 
and professed repentance, his answers were not deem- 
ed, upon the whole, satisfactory. 

Adjourned to meet to-morrow morning. 

THURSDAT MORNING. 

Mr. Cumming asked and obtained leave to present his 
answer to the charges, in writing, which he read as fol- 
lows, viz. 

In regard to the first charge, I confess that I am in 
a high degree guilty. I desire to humble myself before 
my brethren, as well as before the Lord. 1 repent, and 
relying on divine grace, profess a solemn purpose of fu- 
ture and continued reformation. 

As to the second charge, I have, no doubt, said things 
which, put together, have the appearance of contradic- 
tion. I exceedingly regret the circumstance. I had no 
idea, at the time, that I was departing from the truth. 
I hope that what has transpired on this subject, will 
henceforth be the means of teaching me peculiar circum- 
spection. 



60 

2Wr. Ches- lu replying to the third charge, I acknowledge that, 
ter's Trial. j n serving my friend Doct. Ward, I took some steps 
V ^V^'' which were precipitate. I lament that I misunderstood 
1st Charge, the session of the church at Bloomtield, on an important 
. point in that business, and that they misunderstood me. 

Jersev" 2 ° ^' ie ma ^ er nas Deen ^'^J an( * amicably settled between 
presbytery us - The heat of my zeal deprived me of necessary 
read in ev- caution. But upon a solemn and prayerful review of 
idence. the subject, I cannot charge myself with an intentional 
departure from the truth. 

As to the fourth charge, I deeply regret that I was 
too much disposed to conceal facts from the knowledge 
of Mr. John R. Crane, respecting what I had said of his 
father's religious character. 

In replying to the fifth and last charge, I beg leave 
to state that my professions of repentance for my past 
sin, and my promise of no longer making so free use of 
the labors of others, in my future composition of ser- 
mons, were sincere. But I much lament that in conse- 
quence of peculiarly embarrassing circumstances, I had 
with me, while at Connecticut-Farms and Springfield, 
but one sermon purely of my own composing. This I 
preached at the former place. And, as to the one de- 
livered at Springfield, 1 had no doubt that I made re- 
marks which were calculated to convey the idea, that 
this was also my own : in doing which I greatly sinned. 
I was very wrong in taking with me such a sermon as 
that which I preached at Springfield. I blame myself 
much for having preached it. 

In reviewing my whole conduct on the occasion re- 
ferred to, in the preceding charges, I have reason to 
adopt the language of the Psalmist, " Lord, pardon 
my iniquity, for it is great." It is my fervent desire, 
and deliberate and fixed purpose, to manifest, to the 
end of my days, a humble, penitent temper of heart. 
! that 1 may take heed to my steps, lest I again fall ! 
O that the grace of the Divine Spirit may be sufficient 
for me. 

In reply to some questions proposed to him, Mr. 
Cunnming further acknowledged, in detail, that he had, 
in conversation with the Rev. Samuel Whelpley, fal- 
sified the truth, in denying that he used other men's 
compostions as his own ; that he had, in denying to 
Mr. John R. Crane that he had seen Mr. Simeon's 
skeletons, except in two instances, also falsified the 
truth; that he had falsified the truth in making the same 
representation to Mr. Richards, and had further called 
God to witness for the truth of his representation ; that 
he had further falsified the truth, in, for some time, de- 
nying to Mr. Richards and Mr. Spring, the charge of 



61 

plagiarism ; that he had violated his promise in preach- Mr. Ches- 
ing a sermon taken from Toplady, directly after he ter 's Trial. 
had solemnly professed to Mr. Richards and Mr. Spring, >*^ -^v 

his penitence, and engaged no more to preach other 1st Charge, 
men's sermons ; and that lie had also falsified the truth 
in denying to Mr. John R. Crane that he had said to Minutes of 
Mrs. Hughes, that lie was of opinion that Mr. Crane's pr ^by ter 
father had no religion. rem l ;„ c £ 

After Mr. dimming had retired, the presbytery ideuce. 
agreed that the way is now prepared to proceed to de- 
cide on the case. 

The presbytery proceeded to take the question on 
each charge separately, when it was Resolved, 

I. That the Rev. Hooper dimming is, by his own 
confession, gnilty ofihejhrst charge. 

II. That, in view of his answer, it is inexpedient 
that the presbytery prosecute the second charge any fur- 
ther. 

III. That in consideration of his acknowledgment 
and explanation.-, in his answer to the third charge, it 
is inexpedient to prosecute that any further. 

IV. That, by his own confession, he is guilty of the 
fourth charge. 

V. And that, also, by his own confession, he is 
guilty of the fifth charge. 

Alter special prayer for divine direction, and mature 
deliberation, the presbytery Resolved, 

That the Rev. Hooper Cummingbe, and he hereby is 
suspended, from the exercise of the office of the gospel 
ministry, until the next stated meeting of presbytery. 

The presbytery directed Mr. Cumming to confess his 
sin, and profess his repentance before his congregation, 
on the sabbath immediately preceding the next stated 
meeting of presbytery. Mr. Hillyer was appointed to 
attend on the occasion. 

Mr. Cumming was called in, and the decision of 
presbytery read to him. 

I certify that the foregoing is a full and correct trans- 
cript from the minutes of the presbytery of Jersey, on 
the case of the Rev. Hooper Cumming. 

THOMAS PICTON, 

Stated Clerk of Presbytery. 

Westfield, June 15th, 1813. 

All the testimony recorded under the first 
charge, having been read and considered, 
the court unanimously decided, 
I. That it has not been made out on the 



6^ 



Mr . Cbes * part of the prosecution, that the Rev. John 
na J Chester has industriously circulated, or that 



Charge, he has circulated at all, a report of the Rev. 

Hooper Cum mug's preaching at Milton, on 

Son" 1 the 11th December, 1816, a sermon of the 

Rev. Mr. Channing, as it is charged in this 

charge. 

II. That it has been made out, on the part 
of the defendant, that what he did say, of 
his own knowledge, and not as report, rela- 
tive to the sermon preached by Mr. Cumming, 
at Milt>>n, was true. 

III. That inasmuch as preaching is a pub- 
lic act, and the discourse preached, an ac- 
knowledged subject of public conversation, and 
especially inasmuch as the defendant was in 
possession of the facts set forth in the records 
of the presbytery of Jersey, now read in evi- 
dence, he had an undoubted right to say what 
he did relative to the sermon preached at Mil- 
ton, (the same being true) at the times and 
places, and to the persons, and under the cir- 
cumstances in which he said it : and that the 
defence which he has set up and made out, is 
good and sufficient, amounting, alike in law 
and in equity, to a justification. 

2d Charge. SECOND CHARGE. 

Common fame charges the Rev. John Ches- 
ter with making, when in conversation with 
Mr. Mark Tucker, a charge of intoxication 
against the Rev. Hooper Cumming, at the 
house of U. Marvin ; and with falsehood in 
denying the same, when charged therewith, in 
the presence of U. Marvin and I. Hut ton. 
Dr. Nott's Dr. Nott. 

Testimony. Com D{d yQU eyer hear the Rey j ohn 

Chester mike a charge of intoxication against 
the Rev. Hooper Cumming, as charged in 



63 

the second charge ; or, when charged there- Mr - £, be8 ~ 

.,.., & i i • i ^ ^ ter's Trial. 

with, did you ever hear him deny the same ? v^^^y 
Wit. I never did. 2d charge. 

Com. Did you ever hear him say anv thing n , 4 . 

i • i o \ t» Vt ° Testimony. 

relative to the report ot the Rev. Hooper 
Cummings intern perance at U. Marvin's, and, 
if so. what did you hear him say ? 

Wit. I heard him say something on this 
subject ; at what time I do not know. He 
asked me if Mr. Marvin ought to communi- 
cate this to the session of the first church, f 
told him that he ought not to say anv thing 
on the subject. 
Mr. button. 

Com. Did you ever hear Mr. Chester make Mr. Hui- 
a charge of intoxication against the Rev. J, "!'!"*" 

tt ^ • i i • i • timony. 

Hooper dimming, as charged in this second 
charge? Or, did you ever hear him, when 
charged therewith in your presence and Mr. 
U. Marvin s, deny the same ? 

Wit. I never did hear such a charge made 
by Mr. Chester. I heard Mr. Chester deny 
that he had said that Mr. dimming was 
drunk ; but he did not deny that he had giv- 
en Mr. Tucker to understand that Mr. dim- 
ming was the worse for liquor. 

Com. What was the precise question that 
Mr. dimming put to Mr. Chester, at that 
interview, relative to what he had told Mr. 
Mark Tucker, concerning intemperance at 
Mr. Marvin's, and what was the precise an- 
swer of Mr. Chester ? 

Wit. As nearly as I can recollect, Mr. 
dimming said, that Mr. Chester had told Mr. 
Tucker that he was drunk at Mr. Marvin's. 
Mr. Chester said he had not told Mr. Tucker 
that Mr. dimming was drunk ; but, if he 
inferred that from wh.:.t he s>aid, he did not 
know but that there was ground for it. 



64 

Mr. ches- Cross Examination. 

t vli^!'' De f Did not Mr - dimming tell Mr. Ches- 
2d charge, ter, that Mr. Tucker told him, that Mr. Ches- 
. ter told Mr. Tucker, that Mr. U. Marvin told 
es imony. ^ Chester, that Mr Cumming was so drunk 
at Mr. Marvin's house, that he would not suf- 
fer him to go out ? 
Wit. He did. 

Def. Did not Mr. Chester say, I never told 
Mr. Tucker that you was drunk ; nor did I 
authorize him to mention what I told him ; 
but, did not I add to this effect, that if Mr. 
Tucker felt at liberty to say any thing he had 
a right to say, you was in an improper situ- 
ation to go out ? 

Wit That was the substance. 
D f. Did I not maintain throughout, that 
Mr. Tucker had mistaken me in saying, that 
Mr. Cumming was drunk; but that it was 
true, that 1 conversed freely with him upon 
Mr. Cumming's intemperance ? 
Wit. Yes. 
Mr. Marvin. 
Mr u Com. Did you ever hear Mr. Chester make 

Marvin's a charge of intoxication against the Reverend 
Testimony f[ 00 p er Cumming, as charged in this second 
charge? Or, did you ever hear him, when 
charged therewith, deny the same ? 
Wit I never heard such a charge. 
Com. When, where, and what did you 
tell the Rev. John Chester, concerning the 
intemperance of the Rev. Hooper Cum- 
ming ?* 

:R Mr. Cumming enquired of the moderator, whether 
that was a proper question. He did not see that pres- 
bytery had any thing to do with what Mr. Marvin told 
Mr. Chester. Mr. Chester was charged with industri- 
ously circulating injurious reports against him, in a con- 
versation with Mr. Tucker, What Mr. Marvin had 



65 

Wit. When, I cannot state exactly ; it was ^,; ".3! 
at Mr. Chester's room. I told him that I had ^^^ 
satisfied myself with my own eyes, and the 2d Charge. 
observation of the family, aud some of Mr. 
Cummings friends, that Mr. dimming had 
made so free a use of ardent spirits, as not to 
be himself, or, out of his right mind. 

Cum. What was the precise question Mr. 
Cumming asked you, at the interview at Mr. 
Hutton's, relative to his intemperance ; and 
what was your precise answer ? 

Wit. He asked me, I think, did you ever 
see me drunk at your house, so that you held 
me from going out? My answer was, I never 
saw you drunk at my house. 

Com. Why did you not tell Mr. Cumming, 
at that interview, all that you had told Mr. 
Chester ? 

Wit. I don't know that I can tell ; I was 
confused, and avoided it for the sake of fur- 
ther reflection ; I knew that I had never used 
the term, drunk. 

Com. What was the precise question that 
Mr. Cumming put to Mr. Chester at that in- 
terview, relative to what he had told Mr. M. 
Tucker, concerning Mr. Cummings intem- 
perance at Mr. Marvin's, and what was the 
precise answer of Mr. Chester ? 

Wit. I think he said, did you ever say to 

said to Mr. Chester, had nothing to do with the busi- 
ness. 

The moderator replied, it is not with circulating a 
report, but with making a charge. Mr. Chester denies 
having made any charge himself, alleging that Mr. 
Marvin told him that he told Mr. Tucker, and that he 
gave, at the time, Mr. Marvin as his author, and unless 
presbytery ascertain what Mr. Marvin told Mr. Chester, 
they can, in no way, ascertain whether Mr. Chester 
told Mr. Tucker any thing more, or worse than what 
Mr. Marvin had told him. He therefore did not per- 
ceive that the question was out of order. 
9 



m 

Mr. ciies- jyi r Tucker, that Mr. Marvin told you that 

v^v«iL' I was drunk at bis house? Mr. Chester said, 

2d charge. I had such conversation with Mr. Tucker, at 

my room. How far Mr. Tucker was at lib— 

stimony. erty to make use of this discourse, I don't 

know. 

Mr. Cum. Did you not say, at the inter- 
view at Mr. Hutton's, that you never told Mr. 
Chester that you had seen me intoxicated ? 

Wit. Not in those words, to my knowledge. 

Mr. Cum. Are you sure that you can, with 
a safe conscience, at the day of judgment, 
say so ? 

Wit. Yes. 

Mr. Cum. Did you not say, that if you had 
suspected Mr. Cumming of intemperance, 
you would have apprized him of the circum- 
stance, and not told another person ? 

Wit. I don't think that I said such a word. 

Mr. Cum. Are you sure that you can, with 
a safe conscience, at the day of judgment, 
say so ? 

Wit. Yes. 

Mr. Cam. Did not Mr. Chester say, at 
Mr. Isaac Hutton's, on the third day of Jan- 
uary, 1817, that you never told him that you 
saw me drunk at your house ? 

Wit. I don't recollect. 

Mr. Cum. Did not Mr. Chester say that 
you never told him that 1 was so drunk at 
your house, as to make you afraid to permit 
me to leave your house ? 

Wit. Not at that time, to my knowledge. 

Mr. Cum. Did you not acquit Mr. dim- 
ming, by the tenor of your conversation at 
Mr. Hutton's, of every imputation on the 
ground of intemperance ? 

Wit. I do not think I said so much as I 
ought to have said. 



61 

Mr. Cum. Did not Mr. Chester delate, at M '; $f* 
the interview at Mr. Hutton's, that he never s^^^ 
said any thing to Mr. Tucker, which war- 2d Charge 
ranted him in asserting; that you had ever ~ . 
hinted to Mr. Chester, any suspicions on the 
subject of my being intemperate ? 

Wit. No. 

Mr Cum. Are you perfectly sure of this ? 

Wit. I am. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Did notMr.Cumming tell Mr. Ches- 
ter at the interview, that Mr. Tucker told 
him, that Mr. Chester told Mr. Tucker, that 
Mr. Marvin told Mr. Chester that Mr. Cum- 
ming was so drunk at Mr. Marvin's house, 
that he would not suffer him to go out \ 

Wit. Mr. Cummingsaid, Mr. Tucker had 
said that Mr. Chester told him that Mr. Mar- 
vin told Mr. Chester, that Mr. dimming was 
so drunk at his house, that he held him by 
the coat, and would not let him go out. 

Def. Did not Mr. Chester say, I never 
told Mr Tucker that you was drunk ; nor 
did I authorize him to mention what I told 
him. But did I not add to this effect, that 
if Mr. Tucker felt at liberty to say any thing, 
he had a right to say that you was in an im- 
proper situation to go out ? 

Wit. 1 have generally understood that. 

Mr. dimming stated that he had wished to 
cross-examine the witnesses, who were exam- 
ined before he came into court. 

The moderator decided that he should be 
allowed to do so. 

The introduction of Mr. Duncan, as a wit- m in g cans 
ness, was called for by Mr. Cumming. Mr. for test >- 
Chester objected to his introduction, on the wK is 
ground that his name had never before been objected to 

°. , i • .. • | . by the ac- 

given to him, as a witness in his own cause, CUS ed 



68 

twN Trial" but ™ that ° f Mr * Tucker °%> thou g n b > 

v ^ / ^ mistake he might have been cited in both. 
2d Charge. Moderator. For what purpose is it wish- 

T tim n ec * to mtr °d uce Mr. Duncan ? 

Mr. Cumming. To do away Mr. Marvin's 
testimony, by proving that he has contradict- 
ed himself, and sworn contrary to his own po- 
sitive declaration. 
The Court The moderator decided that Mr. Chester's 
decides objection, being constitutional, was conclu- 

that no .J . ' & . ill- i 

new wit- sive ; that new witnesses could be introduced 
nesscanbe on ]y ^y jjj s consen t • an d, besides, it must 

introduced , * 7 .. J . , , , , . . .. 

without be distinctly understood by the parties, if 

consent of w it nesses were to be introduced for the pur- 
ine accus- , , . . , , -. , . r 
ed. pose stated, it would widen the field ot en- 
quiry, by presenting a new point before the 
court, to wit, The credibility of Mr. Marvin, 
whose testimony, if admitted to be credible, 
and allowed to stand good as to the fact of 
his telling Mr. Chester, might be deemed by 
him sufficient for his defence ; unless it shall 
hereafter be proved that Mr. Chester has, in 
the language of the specification now under 
consideration, himself, and without giving 
Mr. Marvin as the author, made a charge of 
intoxication against the Rev. H. Cummin g, 
which Mr. Chester, in his pleadings, denies, 
and which has not, as yet, been made to ap- 
pear. But if either the credibility of Mr. 
mony^de- Marvin be destroyed, or if his testimony now 
sired is of a on record, as to the fact of his having told 
chSS'the Mr - Chester, be not allowed to stand good, 
whole then Mr. Chester himself will become res- 
tXai! eof ponsible for the truth of what, in his plead- 
ings, he has admitted, and, also, of what, 
in the course of the trial, may yet be proved, 
that he has told ; for if Mr. Marvin either did 
not tell Mr. Chester, or was not deserving of 
credit, though he did, the defence set up 



69 

would be unavailing. Whatever, therefore, Mr ; £ hes - 
lessens the credibility of Mr. Marvin, gener- e Ll 



allv, or diminishes the probability of the fact ^a charge, 
of telling, which he has sworn to, increases 
the responsibility of Mr. Chester. And if 
Mr. dimming had, and were to exercise the 
right of introducing additional testimony, ei- 
ther to sink the general credit, or to ren- 
der doubtful the particular testimony on re- 
cord, of the very witness on whose veracity 
alone the defence of Mr. Chester essentially- 
depended, then, and by that act, Mr. Ches- 
ter would acquire the right of introducing ad- 
ditional testimony, either to restore the credit 
ofth^t witness generally, or to confirm the 
fact of the particular telling which he had 
sworn to ; or to establish, for his own de- 
fence, the truth itself of the matter told ; and 
for which, if the witness is not to be believed, 
and to the extent which he is not to be be- 
lieved, Mr. Chester must himself be held by 
the court to be responsible. 

If this new ground were taken, it might 
change the course of the trial, and the truth 
itself of the alleged intemperance at Mr. Mar- 
vin's, as well as the fact of telling, be put at 
issue. 

Mr. Cumming replied that that was what 
he intended ; that since the enquiry had been Mr. Cum- 
commenced, he meant to have the whole "'"£ in " 
truth brought out, and cause the sun to shine 
on that transaction. 

The moderator said, if that was Mr. Cum- 
ming's determination, after what he had 
stated, he should not, if the parties consent- 
ed, make any further objection. 

The committee for the prosecution having The ^un- 
consented, the moderator asked Mr. Chester sents° a 
whether he also consented. Mr. Chester re- 



Mr. cfaes- pi^d } that he did ; and, waving his right, 

^1^ withdrew his objection to the introduction of 

2d Charge. Mr. Duncan. 

Mr. Duncan was then called and sworn, 
when it was objected, by a member of the 
court, that he had been present when Mr. 
Marvin was examined. 

witness Moderator. Was you present during the 

dismissed examination of Mr. Marvin 1 

on other T 

grounds. Witness. 1 was. 

The witness was dismissed. 

Mr. Backus. 

Com. Did you ever hear Mr. Chester, make 

3\ir. e. f. a charge of intoxication against the Rev. 

testimony. Hooper Gumming, as charged in this second 

charge? Or, did you ever hear him, when 

charged therewith, in the presence of Mr. I. 

Hutton and U. Marvin, deny the same ? 

Wit. I never heard him in the presence of 
Mr. Marvin. 

Com. Has Mr. Chester ever told you any 
thing, as communicated to him by Mr. Mar- 
vin, relative to Mr. Cumming's intemper- 
ance ; if so, when and where, and what did 
he tell you 1 

Wit. The time I do not recollect. He said 
Mr. Marvin told him that Mr Cumming had 
been in such a situation, from the improper 
use of liquor, that he did not think proper to 
permit him to go into the street. 

Com. What relation are you to Mr. Ches- 
ter ? 

Wit. Brother-in-law. 

Com. Do you profess religion ? 

Wit. Yes. 

Winae'f" Mr Winr>e ' 

testimony. Com. Did you ever hear Mr. Chester make, 
when in conversation with Mr. Mark Tucker, 
a charge of intoxication against the Rev. 



Hooper dimming, at the house of Mr. U. JJ*; gjj 

Marvin ? Or, did you ever hear him, when ^s,^ 
charged therewith, in the presence of Mr. U. 2d Charge. 
31arvin and Mr. I. Hutton, deny the same ? Testiraony . 

It it. No, sir. 

Com. Did you ever hear Mr. U. Marvin 
tell Mr. Chester, or tell in his presence, any 
thing concerning the Rev. Hooper Cumming's 
intemperance ; if so, when, where, and what 
did he tell him, or in his presence ? 

Wit. Capt. Marvin did say in the session 
of the second church, before Mr. Chester, 
th»t he had seen Mr. Cumming disguised 
with liquor at his house. 

Mr. Cum. How then could you consistent- 
ly declare to Drs. Nott and Hosack, and Mr. 
M'Crea, in Schenectady, that you knew 
not with what common fame charged Mr. 
Cumming ? 

Wit. I stated to that committee, that I 
knew nothing from my own personal knowl- 
edge. 

Mr. Cum. Was not this the question pro- 
posed to you by that committee, With what 
does common fame charge Mr. Cumming ? 

Wit. Not to my recollection. 
Mr. Boardman. j.Boarj- 

Com. Did you ever hear Mr. U. Marvin tell man's tes- 
Mr. Chester, or tell in his presence, any thing tmoxt ?' 
concerning the Rev. Hooper Cumming's in- 
temperance ; if so, when, where, and what 
did he tell him, or in his presence ? 

Wit. I heard Mr. Marvin, in Mr. Chester's 
study, say that Mr. Cumming had been dis- 
guised with liquor at Mr. Marvin's house ? 

Com. Are you a member of Mr. Chester's 



session 



WiU Yes. 



12 

Srt Trial* Ml ' TuckeV - 

ri om. Did you ever hear the Rev. John 



2d charge. Chester make, when in conversation with 

you, a charge of intoxication against the 

er' r 8 testi- Rev. Hooper Gumming, as charged in this 

mony. second charge ; or when charged therewith 

in the presence of Mr. I. Hutton, and U. 

Marvin, deny the same ? 

Wit No, s'ir. 

Com. Did Mr. Chester tell you that Mr. 
Marvin told him any thing concerning Mr. 
Cumming's intemperance at his house ; if so, 
when, where, and what did he tell you ? 

' it. I do not recollect the time when. He 
said Mr. Marvin told him, that Mr. Gum- 
ming had been under the influence of spir- 
itous liquor ; and so much so, that he con- 
sidered it imprudent for him to leave his 
house. 

Mr. Gumming stated, that he held certain 
m ing intro- documents, presented him by the commis- 
duces a re- sioners, and wished the same to be recorded. 
EomVh" 06 The papers having been read, it was 
commis- objected that the commissioners were not 
3d church, parties, or any way before presbytery ; nor 
had they any thing to do with the cause at is- 
sue. 

The moderator observed, that though they 
were not, they were, in a certain sense, the 
agents of a respectable portion of the reli- 
gious community ; and they had a right to 
their opinion, and a right to differ from the 
presbytery. 

It might be that the presbytery were in 
error, particularly the moderator, and if he 
had given a wrong opinion, he would retract 
it, the moment he was convinced of it. And 
as it was possible he might have, it was his 
honest wish, for the sake of Mr. Gumming, 



"IS 

that as the moderator's opinion would become ^ **«|" 
matter of record; that whatever Mr. Cum- ^v^ 
mine:, or his friends, might wish to record 2a charge, 
beside it, to counteract its supposed injurious 
effect, should also be recorded. Though 
the commissioners, as such, had no rights at 
issue. Mr. dimming had rights, as a member 
of presbytery. If he moved the acting on 
those papers, it was the decision of the mode- 
rator that they should be acted on. 

Whereupon, Mr. dimming moved that the 
request contained in document N°* 1. of the 
commissioners, be granted, which was again 
read, and is as follows : 

" The commissioners of the third presby- 
terian church of the city of Albany, present f t e ™™ e * of 
the following considerations to the presbytery. Commis- 
Thev have learned with deep regret, the s Q '? ne u rs °. f 

J 1-ti 1 1 1 • 1 n 3d church. 

course which has been adopted in the present 
investigation against Mr. Chester. Interro- 
gatories in writing have been propounded to 
witnesses, adduced in support of the charges 
against Mr. Chester, in the forming of which 
the commissioners never have been consulted ; 
interrogatories which have been formed by the 
aid and concurrence of Mr. Chester, and 
his counsel (as has been suggested to them) 
in manifest violation of the ordinary course of 
proceeding ; and which interrogatories are 
by no means calculated to elicit the whole 
truth, but are, in many respects, imperfect, 
if not highly mischievous. The commission- 
ers, therefore, remonstrate against such in- 
terrogatories, and they beg leave to substi- 
tute others, which will obviate the objection 
above alluded to. They also, firmly, but 
respectfully, remonstrate against the proceed- 
ings being, any longer, conducted or man- 
aged by the present managers, and they pray 
40 



14 

M * £J ! £!' that the commissioners, by themselves, or by 
^^^Z their counsel, may conduct and manage the 
2d Charge, said investigation. 

Isaac Lucas, 
William Eaton, 
J. T. B. Graham. 
Albany, April 9th, 1 817." 
P rd *r ta " Whereupon, Resolved, That the committee 
on. for conducting the trial of Messrs. Chester 

and Tucker, receive any interrogatories from 
Messrs. Eaton, Graham and Lucas, touching 
the points at issue, to be presented to the 
presbytery. 

Mr. Gumming moved, that the request 
contained in document No. 2. of the com- 
missioners be granted, which was again read, 
and is as follows : 

" Whereas Mr. Richard Duncan was 
Resolution yesterday sworn, as a witness in support of 

proposed •*' . J '. rr 

by the the charges against Mr. Chester, and, alter 
above com- b em g so SW orn, was not permitted to be ex- 

missioners . » ' ii r iiii 

ihro' Mr. ammed, on the ground that he had been pre- 
Cumming. sen f. j n ^ e p re sbytery, while another witness 
x . as under examination. 

And whereas, however incorrect it might 
be for Mr. Duncan to have been so present, 
and however it might subject him to eccle- 
siastical censure, yet it could form no ground 
for disallowing his testimony. 

Therefore, Resolved, That Mr. Duncan be 
now examined as a witness. April 9M." 

In support of this motion, it was stated by 
Doct. Goe, that it was the usage, in other 
presbyteries, to do this. 
Modera- Whereupon the moderator said, that it was 
with regret that he dismissed Mr. Duncan, 
yesterday. After it had been settled, that he 
should be admitted, and also settled, (though 
contrary to his original opinion and advice) 



tO!' 8 op 

ion. 



To 

that the whole truth of the report of intempe- JJj^ J*JJ 
ranee at Mr. Marvin's, should be put at issue, s^y^/ 
all his decisions would, hereafter, be in favour fid charge 
of the developement of truth, let it aftect 
whomsoever it would ; and he did not con- 
sider the article in the constitution imperative, 
particularly where the parties consented to 
the admission of the witness. He should, 
therefore, decide in favour of admitting him. 

Mr. Cumming, also, in behalf of the com- 
missioners, moved the following- resolution : 

" Resolved, That the Rev. Mr. Chester and 
Mr. Tucker, and the managers of the charges 
against them, or either of them, be at liberty 
to introduce any witness to points which are 
now under discussion, provided this privilege 
do not extend to proof concerning new charges 
against Mr Chester and Mr Tucker. 

The moderator stated, that it was unne- 
cessary to act on this resolution, as the ques- 
tion it brought up "had already been settled, 
when Mr. Duncan was first called for as a 
witness ; and it was on record, that Mr. 
Chester waved his right to object to the intro- 
duction of new witnesses, and therefore the 
liberty contemplated by this resolution, was 
already in possession of the parties. 

A Document in the words following : Furthei 

" Whereas the interests and feelings of a resolution 
large and respectable Congregation, are F°^ ed 
deeply concerned in the present investiga- commis- 
tion — And whereas justice requires that the 
proceedings should be impartial, as well as 
it regards the reputation of the Rev. Mr. 
Cumming, as that of Mr. Chester — And 
whereas it appears that the present modera- 
ator, Doct. Nott, has expressed sentiments 
which strongly mark a state of hostility 
towards Mr, Cumming, and indicate a total 



■loners. 



^5 

Mr. Ches- disregard of that christian benevolence and 
>^ J^ ,' truth which adorn the ministry, especially by 
ed Charge, openly charging Mr Gumming in presbytery, 
with insanity." — Therefore, Bestlvcd, as the 
sense of this presbytery, that Doct. Nott ought 
no longer to be moderator of this presbytery," 
was presented by Mr. Cumming, as he stated, 
at the request of Messrs. Lucas, Eaton, and 
Graham. 

The moderator decided that the same be 
recorded. 

Mr. Cumraing again enquired, when he 
might cross-examine the witnesses whose 
testimony was taken when he was absent. 

The moderator told him, at any moment 
when there was an opening, that the court 
was then occupied, and there were witnesses 
in waiting ; but that he should certainly have 
an opportunity of doing this, before the trial 
closed. 

Examination nf Mr. Duncan, sworn on 
the part of the prosecution. 
Mr. R. 0° the third of January last, the Rev. H. 

Duncan's Cumming and Mr. U. Marvin called at Mr. 
testimony. ]) uncan ' s nouse ( a s Mr. Duncan was inform- 
ed by his family, himself not being at home 
at that time) and left a request for Mr. Dun- 
can to call that evening at Mr. Marvin's. 
That accordingly in the evening Mr. Dun- 
can and I. Lucas called at Mr. Marvin's, and 
there, after some conversation about the Rev. 
Mr. Cumming, he, the said Marvin, in pre- 
sence of Mr Duncan and I. Lucas, declared 
in positive and unqualified terms, that he had 
never seen the Rev. Mr. Cumming drunk at 
his house ; nor had he any reason to sus- 
pect him of being so. but he had been in- 
formed by people from Schenectady, and 
whom he must believe, that Mr. Cumming 



made use of a quart of ardent spirits in his * Tr ,- ^es- 
family, a day. ygivW 

Hon. Smith Thompson. 2d charge. 

Com. Do \ou know any thino; concerning . 

., . lid lestiraonv. 

this second charge .' 

Wit. I never heard Mr. Chester say any 
thing on the subject. 
Chancellor Kent. 

Com. Do you know any thino; concerning 
this second charge ; if so, what do you know ? 

Wit. I know nothing. 
C. R. Webster. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this second charge ; if so, what do you know ? 

Wit. I do not. 
Mr. Graham. 

Com. Do you know any thing of this se- 
cond charge. 

Wit. Nothing. 
Major Smith. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this second charge ; if so, what do you know '? 

Wit. I know nothing 
Doct. Willard. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this second charge ? 

Wit. I do not. 
Mr. Eights. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this second charge ? 

Wit. I do not. 
Mr. Bulkley. 

[Witness knew nothing concerning the se- 
cond charge.] 

Com. Did you ever hear Mr. U. Marvin 
tell Mr. Chester, or tell in his presence, any 
thing concerning Mr. Cumming's intemper- 
ance ? If so, when, where, and what did he 
tell him, or tell in his presence ? 



18 

m,. C6es- Wit. At the meeting of session, Mr. Mar- 

I^y^/' vin said that he had frequently seen Mr. Cum- 

2d charge, ming under the influence of liquor ; and when 

asked, if there was any doubt on the subject, 

lony * he said that it would be evident from the 

smell of the liquor ; and that this was done at 

his house, and that he witnessed it. 

Com. Are you a member of Mr. Chester's 
session ? 
Wit. lam. 

Cross Examination. 
Dvf. Is Mr. Marvin a member of our ses- 



sion 



Wit. Yes. 

IJef. Was Mr. Marvin's communication 
confidential ? 

H it. I considered it so. 

Mr. Warren. 
Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this second charge ; if so, what do you 
know ? 

Wit. I know nothing of my own knowledge ; 
only from hear-say. 
Gilbert Stewart. 
Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this second charge ? 
Wit. Nothing. 

Capt. L. Bosworth was called on the part 
Captain of the defendant. Mr. dimming objected 
L * f° s ' to him on the ground that iiis introduction 

worth's iii • • i 111 

testimony, would be unconstitutional, as he had not 
been cited, and notice thereof been given to 
the committee, at least ten days. 

The moderator decided that Capt. Bos- 
worth might be admitted. 

Mr. Cumming s ppealed from the decision 
of the chair, and the question was deferred 
until an interlocutory meeting. 



*19 

Examination of Mm Hannah Peck, sworn ^ j5j 
on the part of the defendant. s^s ^ 

Dcf Has the Rev. Hooper dimming been u charge. 
frequently at Mr. U. Marvin's, as a guest ? Tegtimon , 

Wit. He has, sir. 

Dcf. In what relation do you stand to Mr. Miss h. 
Marvin I deck's tes " 

tt- • • i timony. 

Wit. His sister-in-law. 

Df Do you live in his family ? 

Hit. Yes, sir. 

Dtf Have you ever seen the Rev. Hooper 
Cumming drink ardent spirits intemperately, 
and in such quantities, that he did not appear 
to be himself ? 

Wit. Yes, sir. 

Dcf. Have you. or have you not ever put 
liquor beyond bis reach, lest he should drink 
so much as to make him intemperate, and 
improper to be seen 1 

H it. Yes, sir, I have ; and afterwards have 
been obliged to fetch it at his call. 

Def. Have you, or have you not, frequently 
seen Mr. Gumming in such a state in the 
afternoon and evening, from the use of liquor, 
that he appeared like a different man from 
what he did, when he first got up, and in the 
first part of the day. 

Wit. Yes sir, I have. 

Dcf. Have you ever conversed with Mr. 
Marvin and your sisters on the subject of 
Mr. Cumming's intemperance ? 

Wit. Yes, sir, I have frequently. 

Examination of Miss Lucretia Peck, sworn Miss L. 
on the part of the defendant. S^ny!"" 

Dcf In what relation do you stand to Mr. 
Marvin ? 

Wit. His sister-in-law. 

Dcf Do you live in his house ? 
Wit. Yes, sir. 



so 

M r»s TrfaT ^ p f m ^ as ^ e ^ eV- hooper Cumming been 
\^^^ frequently at Mr. U. Marvin's house as a 

2d Charge. gUest ? 

Testimon ^ f ' ^ es > Sir * 

Def. Have you ever seen the Rev. Hooper 
Cumming drink anient spirits intern perately, 
and in such quantities, that he did not appear 
to be himself/ 

Wit. Yes, sir. 

Def. Have you ever conversed with Mr. 
U. Marvin and your sisters, on the subject 
of Mr. Cumming's intemperance ? 

Wit. A number of times. 

Cross Examination. 

Mr. Cum. Have not these same questions 
been made known to you before you came to 
this house ? 

Wit. No, sir. 

Mr. Cum Have you not been urged to 
appear before this presbytery: and by whom? 

H it. I have not been. 

Mr. Cum. Did not Mr. Chester urge you? 

Wit. No, sir. 

Mr. Cum. Did not Mr. U. Marvin ? 

Wit. No, sir. 

Com. Whit was the conduct of Mr Cum- 
ming, which you supposed to be the effect of 
intoxication ? 

Wit Imprudent behaviour and speeches. 
Mr. Cum- During the examination of Miss Peck, Mr. 
Sains C oT Cumming stated that the course the trial was 
the course taking, was injurious and unjust; that the 
?[ g P roceed- questions were so formed, that it brought to 
issue, not the charges on record against Mr. 
Chester, but the charges on record against 
Mr. Gumming, hereafter to be tried in Sche- 
nectady. He thought the moderator assigned 
as a reason for adopting one of the rules for 
conducting the several trials at issue, that he 



81 

M to keep the trials distinct. He called ** £J»J; 
for the reading of that rule. The record, it v^y^/ 
appeared, was not present. He then de- 2d charge. 
mantled of the moderator to say, whether it 
was proper to take testimony, which related, 
not to Mr. Chester*, but to Mr. Cummiog's 
cause. 

The moderator said, that in a cause situ- JJ r °***" ly . 
ated like the present (and especially after the 
ground taken and settled by the parties, at 
the instance of Mr. Camming, on the ques- 
tion of introducing Mr. Duncans testimony) 
he did not see that it was possible to deny 
the defendant the privilege of giving the 
truth in evidence. Mr. Chester is charged 
with the industrious circulation of reports in- 
jurious to the character of the Rev. Hooper 
Camming. If it is true that Mr. Chester has 
circulated such reports at all, or made such 
charges, it is not possible for presbytery to 
ascertain his innocence, or the degree of his 
guilt, or in any way to come to a righteous 
decision in his case, without knowing whe- 
ther, what he has said; be true or false. If 
false, he is deeply guilty ; if true, even still, 
unless his motive was good, he is guilty. 

Mr Lncas. ^ T T „ 

Mr. I umnung. Did not Mr. dimming cas' testi- 
say that Mr. Chester, at the interview held raonY ' 
at Mr. Hutton's house, asserted that Mr. 
Marvin never told him (Mr. Chester) that 
he had seen Mr. dimming intoxicated at his 
house ; and that he (Mr. Chester) had not 
told Mr. Tucker that Mr. Marvin so said to 
him (Mr. Chester?) 

Wit. Mr. Cumming did say to me, that 

Mr. Chester, at the interview at Mr. Hutton's, 

did say that Mr. Marvin never told him that 

he (Mr. dimming) was intoxicated : and 

11 



S3 



m. ches- that he (Mr. Chester) never told Mr. Tucker 

ter's Trial. v ' 

2d charge. Mr. f'um. Did not Mr. Marvin say the 
_ . same in substance, with what Mr. Cumming 

Testimony. . , , . _ ' ° 

stated to you ? 

Wit. I have heard Mr. Marvin say, that he 
never told any body th »t you was intoxicated. 

Mr. Cum. Did not Mr. Marvin say to you, 
that he had never suspected Mr. Cumming of 
being guilty of intemperance? 

Wit. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cum. Did not Mr. Marvin say to you 
explicitly, th it he had never seen Mr. Cum- 
ming drunk? 

Wit. He did so * 

Drunkenness was next introduced. Mr. 
Marvin did not state any thing relative to this 
particular charge; but we asked him if he, 
(Mr. Marvin) ever saw Mr. Cumming intox- 
icated. Mr. Marvin said he had not, nor sus- 
pected him of being a person of that descrip- 
tion; that Mr. Marvin had never seen him, 
(Mr. Cumming) make an improper use of li- 
quor at his house; but he (Mr. Marvin) had 
learnt, from a person in Schenectady, that 
Mr. Cumming used a quart of spirituous li- 
quor a day. Further, at an interview with Mr. 
Marvin, when a committee was appointed to 
investigate charges against Mr. Cumming, 
Doct.Nott called upon me, informing me that 
he was going to Albany, to inquire into the 
charges. Agreed that Messrs. Lucas and 
Cumming should go with him, if they wished. 
Mr. Lucas went with the committee to Mr. 
Marvin's. The committee, with Mr. Marvin 
and Lucas, retired to a private room. The 
committee stated to Mr. Marvin, that Mr. 

*After the Milton sermon, see Mr. Lucas' testimony 
under the first charge. 



Marvin reported, or that it was reported, that Mr ; £ h . es ," 

ai/-< • • * liTli ter's Trial. 

J>Jr. dimming was intoxicated at his house .^ v ^/ 
and th t Mr. Marvin prevented him from 2d Charge, 
going out of his house. Mr. Marvin replied, 
he had never said so, but he wished he could 
see the man that said he said so. Mr. Marvin 
sail to Mr. dimming, you know that I have 
said toyou, that according to my ideasof pru- 
dence, you have acted imprudently. Mr. 
M *rvin said, I don't know what the report of 
my holding you by the arm started from, 
except it w is this, that I requested you to put 
up at my house, for your manner was such, 
that good, steady people would be disgusted 
with you, not knowing you. 
Question by Mr. Smith. 

Did Mr. Marvin, in his remarks to that 
committee, in the conversation last mentioned, 
according to your understanding, exculpate 
Mr. dimming from all suspicion of imtein- 
perance at his house, or only deny that he 
was drunk ? 

Wit. The word intoxication was made 
use of. 

Mr. dimming made a motion, " That the 
judicial proceedings of the presbytery be ar- Trial FU6 . 
rested until to-morrow morning at 9 o'clock, pe Jed till 
that Mr. Gumming may have a fair opportunity oV'ieqTest 
of expressing his sentiments, and stating his ° r Mr- 
grievances in writing, relative to the course ummiD &- 
presbytery have already taken, touching the 
trial of Mr. Chester." 

The moderator stated, that the situation of 
Mr. Cumming was peculiar, and he trusted 
the court would be disposed to grant him the 
indulgence for which he had moved. The 
question being taken, was decided unani- 
mously in the affirmative. 



it 

J.£ Mr. Gumming then moved, " That Mr. 
v^y^, dimming be permitted to have free access, in 
ed charge, the mean time, to the records of the presby- 
tery which were made previously to the adop- 
tion of Mr. Chester's objection, which exclud- 
ed Mr. Cumming's testimony." Which mo- 
tion having been decided in the affirmative, 
the judicial proceedings were arrested, and 
iociitor"" P reSD ytery went into an interlocutory meet- 
meeting, ing, on the appeal of Mr. dimming from the 
decision of the chair. 

The moderator stated, in the interlocutory 
mingS U ab"- mee tuig, that the question to be taken was, 
jection to Whether the decision of the chair (in favour 
wo?th»f ° 8 °f Capt. Bosworth's introduction as a wit- 
testimony ness, against which Mr. dimming had ob- 
considered jected, on the ground that it would be un- 
constitutional, as he had not been cited, and 
ten days notice thereof given to the commit- 
tee on the part of the prosecution) should be 
sustained. 

The article, alluded to in the constitution, 
was in the words following : 

" When complaint is made before the pres- 
bytery, it must be reduced to writing, and 
nothing further is to be done at the first meet- 
ing, unless by consent of parties, than giv- 
ing the minister a full copy of the charges, 
with the names of the witnesses annexed 
thereto; and citing all parties, and their wit- 
nesses, to appear and be heard at the next 
meeting, which shall not be sooner than ten 
days after such citation. 

In perfect conformity with this article of 
the constitution, presbytery may, the moment 
the charges are tabled, if the parties consent, 
proceed to issue them 

The witness in question is Mr. Chester's. 
He of course consents to his introduction. 



85 

Nothing therefore but the consent of the pres- Mr - Che * 

• . ter s Trial 

b\te . v, is requisite to bring him within the >^ v ~ m J 
constitutional limit, even though the consti- 2d Charge. 
tution had said, no witness sh ill be introduc- 
ed unless by consent of parties, without ten 
days previous notice and citation. But the 
constitution says no such thing. So far from 
requiring that the defendant shall name his 
witnesses to the prosecutor, ten days before 
the trial, it does not even require that he 
shall name them to him, at all. It is to the 
accused only that the constitution secures 
this privilege, and it is not reciprocal. Nor 
is it necessary that it should be. The busi- 
ness of the prosecutor is to establish charges, 
and he can bring what evidence he pleases in- 
to court, without knowing what counter evi- 
dence will be brought. But the prosecuted 
does not know what evidence will be needful 
for him to bring, till he is informed what ev- 
idence is to be brought against him. Hence 
the constitution interposes and secures to 
him, that information, ten days, at least, pre- 
vious to his trial. 

The question having been discussed, and Decision o* 
Mr. Cumming heard, at length, the deci- JJ^™ 
sion of the chair was sustained. 

On the reading of this decision, when the 
court opened on Thursday morning, Mr. Mr. Cum- 
Cumming said he made another objection to ming urges 
the introduction of Capt. Bosworth, that had JectkmV 
been omitted, to wit: That it violated the de- 
cision of the presbytery, as appears from their 
records, (which however he could not see) 
it was made on the — of March. 

The moderator said, he regretted that the 
records of the meeting alluded to, were not 
present — he had no recollection of any deci- 
sion at variance with that now made. But 



S6 

Mr. che6- on whichever of these objections Mr. Cura- 
\^y v m/ m * S rene d, >t was to be regretted that it had 
2d Charge, not occurred before. It could not, surely, 
have been his uniform opinion, that the in- 
troduction of new witnesses was either irreg- 
ular or unconstitutional, else he would not 
have moved, in his own behalf, on the first 
day of the trial, for the introduction of Mr. 
Duncan, whose name had not been given to 
Mr. Chester ; norwou'd he have again mov- 
ed in behalf of the commissioners, for Mr. 
Duncan's readmission on the second day of 
the triil; nor, especially, would he have mov- 
ed, in behalf of the same commissioners, and 
on the same day, " That bo'h Mr. Chester 
and Mr. Tucker, and the managers if the 
charges against them should be at liberty to 
introduce any witnesses to points now under 
discussion." And yet Mr. Cumming would 
recollect that he had himself made all these 
several motions ; which last motion was not 
acted on, bee » use the court considered the 
question already settled, and that the privi- 
lege contemplated by it, had become in the 
present cause, by the consent of the defend- 
ant, common to the parties. 

The moderator informed the court, that 

conformably to their order, he had put his 

own remarks into the hands of Mr. Cumming, 

and that the clerk had read to him every 

thing from the previous records, which Mr. 

Cumming wished to have read to him. 

Mr: Cum- Mr. Cumming then read a detailed state- 

™ l n n t ^ p a r j* e . ment of grievances, which was, afterwards, 

tailed presented to be recorded, in the words fol- 

ofgnevan- 1WVV1 "& • . m 

ces. " In conformity with a resolution passed 

by the presbytery of Albany, on the 9th day 
of April, 1817, permitting the Rev. Hooper 



Cummins:, in a written form to express his JJ r ; £JjJ- 
sentiments and st te his grievances, relative s ^ / ^ 
to the proceedings of said prebytcry, in the 2d Chorge. 
trial of the Rev. John Chester, Mr. Cumming 
observes, Mr. Cow- 

•• First. That this presbytery have pro- statement 
ceeded in a disorderly and unchristian man- of s rievan * 
ner, inasmuch as they h ve permitted ques- 
tions to lie proposed and answered, which 
prejudge a cause, in which he is deeply in- 
terested, and which is to be tried at Sche- 
nectady, on the 22d instant ; inasmuch as they 
have permitted Mr. Chester and his friends 
to put interrogatories, the very nature of 
which, independent of the answers given 
thereto, is calculated to injure the reputation 
of Mr. Cumming- ; and inasmuch, as Mr. 
Cumming has been, in several instances, 
violently and successfully opposed, under the 
sanction, and with the approbation of this 
presbytery, when he ende wored to ask ques- 
tions tending to his own exculpation. 

" Secondly. That the course of proceeding 
above alluded to, is in direct violation of the 
principles of humanity, the constitution of 
the presbyterian church, and the benevolent 
religion of the Lord Jesus Christ, which 
principles do all, most pointedly condemn, as 
unjust, a system of proscription, persecution 
and pre-judgment of a cause not yet decided. 

11 Thirdly. That it is perfectly well known 
to the presbytery, Mr. Cumming has never 
been arraigned at their bar, nor cited to 
appear, on a charge of intemperance, and 
yet testimony has been permitted to be taken 
under oath, charging him with that crime. 

" Fourthly. That measures were adopted, 
at the suggestion of Mr. Cumming's enemies, 
as he has very strong reasons to believe, 



8S 
Mr ; S^V * or the purpose of keeping: him from the presw 

ter's Trial. , r r r » . f 

v ^^ v ^ bytery at the commencement ot their present 
2d Charge, session ; that Mr. Curaming did, in conse- 
quence of the representations made to him, 
Mr. Cum- conceive it to be a duty he owed the cause of 
demerit his Divine Master, to absent himself from 
ofgrievan- the meeting of presbytery about two hours 
on the morning of Tuesday, April 8th, 
because an impression had been fastened on 
his mind, by the most solemn declarations of 
a man whom he had, and still has, very 
strong reasons to consider his friend ; but 
who has, as Mr. Cummingnow unwaveringly 
believes, been misled by the enemies of Mr, 
Gumming, that the presbytery would sit 
with closed doors : and, so sitting, endea- 
vour to effect a reconciliation between all 
persons concerned in the painful transactions 
which are now at issue, and will be until 
after the 22 d instant : that the presbytery did 
not attempt such a pacific measure, but pro- 
ceeded imuiediately to business with open 
doors, and then permitted Mr. Chester to 
calumniate Mr. dimming, in the most 
shameful manner, as appears from the ela- 
borate harangue which he read, and which 
is now on record — that when Mr. Cumming 
was, by tried friends, providentially and to 
his utter surprize, informed of the course the 
presbytery were pursuing, he appeared as a 
member of the house, but was immediately 
informed that he could not then take his seat, 
because he was a witness in the case — that, 
when he was about being called, for the pur- 
pose of giving his testimony, that testimony 
was objected to, on the ground of his interest 
in the cause — that Mr. Chester was permitted 
successfully to oppose the admission of that 
testimony, and even while he passed a com- 



89 

plimcnt evidently insincere on Mr. Cumming's Mr ; ^ he *' 
veracity, to state that his own acquittal would .^^*^j 
be his condemnation ; thus identifying his own litharge. 
cause with charges never brought before pres- 
bytery, in any shape, against Mr. Gumming; Mr -^ um - 
that, after all these cruel and unprecedented statement 
measures, Mr. Mark Tucker, directly and °fgrievan- 
deeplv involved as he is, in the charges ex- 
hibited against Mr. Chester, was permitted to 
testify in the case, and that Doct. Nott, the 
moderator of the presbytery, w is, without any 
opposition on their part suffered, when Mr- 
Chester's objection against Mr. Cumming's 
testimony was under consideration 7 , deliber- 
ately to charge Mr. Gumming with insanity ; 
a charge which powerfully tends, as f tr as 
that Reverend Doctor's opinion has influence, 
to destroy Mr. Cumming's dearest temporal 
interests. 

* Fifthly. It needs no argument to prove, 
that the presbytery have not a right to pre- 
judge any case ; and surely none is needful 
to show the wicked precipitancy of permitting 
a minister of the gospel, while in good and 
regular standing, to be calumniated and re- 
viled, stigmatized and held up to publick 
odium, under any plea whatever. 

" Sixthly. Mr. Gumming complains, that, 
in repeated instances, he has been debarred 
the privilege of expressing his sentiments on 
the floor of this presbytery, while other gen- 
tlemen have not been so embarrassed ; and 
that, although there his been a studious ef- 
fort on the part of Dr Nott, the moderator, 
to make the publick believe him impartial, 
he has, nevertheless, repeatedly prevented 
Mr. dimming from speaking, when, in his 
place as a member of the house, he consider- 
ed himself precisely in order. 
12 



90 

^ ^'T " Seventhly. Mr. Cumming feels himself 

tcr's I rial. , , . •> . » , j. 

bound in conscience to state, that this pres- 



2d Charge, bytery have not now, nor ever had, a con- 
stitutional, or scriptural right to take that 
^r r . Cum- w i(j e range which they have embraced, in 

Tiling's . ? _ « .__ - 11 

statement the examination ol witnesses, on Mr. Cnes- 
ofgrievan- ter > s tr j a j They ought to have confined 
themselves to the points at issue, which are 
these : — 1. An industrious circulation of 
reports injurious to the character of Mr. 
Gumming. — 2. Slandering Mr. dimming, in 
a conversation with Mr. Tucker. — 3. False- 
hood in denying that he had told Mr. Tucker 
any thing prejudicial to the moral character 
of Mr. Gumming. — 4. Falsehood, in contra- 
dicting that denial. These are, in fact, the 
points at issue in Mr. Chester's case, how- 
ever artfully drawn the charges and specifi- 
cations, already recorded on the minutes of 
this presbytery, may be. Now, then, the 
presbytery should not have deviated from 
this course of procedure, viz : examining wit- 
nesses and proposing the charges in due or- 
der, they ought to have asked, what do you 
know, concerning these several charges, and 
not, what do you know concerning Mr. dim- 
ming. This should have been the mode, par- 
ticularly as Mr. dimming is not now on trial 
before the presbytery ; and more particularly, 
because he has never been arraigned, at all, 
on the article of intemperance, and more 
particularly still, because this presbytery are, 
or may very soon be put in possession of the 
fact, that the committee of investigation, 
appointed at Schenectady in the month of 
February last, on the case of common fame, 
versus the Rev. Hooper dimming, did, after 
a patient and prolonged hearing, on this very 
topic, unanimously reject the charge, as a 



01 

calumny unsupported by evidence, and ori- jj r ; fjjj? 3 ' 
gloating iu a spirit of persecution. v^v^ 

" Eighthly. Mr. dimming moreover com- 2a Charge, 
plains, that he has not been able to procure 
the privilege and the just and unalienable M . r '? ua »- 
right appertaining to him, as a member of this statement 
house (although he has several times de- of g ,ieva " 
manded that right, of the presbytery) of 
cross-examining witnesses, who testified be- 
fore he had an opportunity of being present ; 
he observes that he ought to have been ex- 
amined as a witness ; that his testimony 
ought to have been taken at a very early pe- 
riod of this prosecution ; he complains more- 
over, that he has been trilled with and op- 
pressed, inasmuch as, after having been 
debarred the right of taking his seat as a 
member of the presbytery, on the ground 
that he was a witness in the case, the giving 
of his testimony was finally objected to ; that 
he has wished to cross-examine the Rev. 
Docts. Hosack and Nott, and Mr. Isaac Hut- 
ton, but in vain ; and that, after more than 
one application to th.it effect, he could nei- 
ther procure a decision of this presbytery, on 
the question, nor obtain a knowledge of the 
time when, if ever, such cross-examination 
might be instituted. 

Ci Ninthly. Mr. Cumming has no objec- 
tion that his whole conduct, since he became 
a member of this presbytery, should become 
matter of judicial investigation, provided the 
presbytery proceed according to the consti- 
tution of the church ; but he does most sol- 
emnly protest to a course of measures, which 
tries him when not arraigned, on charges too, 
which have not been exhibited against him ; 
and that, moreover, for the purpose of excul- 



ces. 



92 

S's Tki "P atin g an( ^ justifying Mr. Chester, the ac- 
v^*^^,' tual criminal at your bar. 
2d Charge. " Tenthly. It can be substantiated by in- 
corruptible and sufficient testimony, that Dr. 
Mr. Cum- N ^ ^id, at tne ] ast mee ting of the presby- 
statement tery, assign it as a reason tor two rules or or- 
^s rievan ' der, which he moved, and which were by 
presbytery adopted, that the trials of Mr. 
Tucker and Mr dimming, which are to suc- 
ceed Mr. Chester's, might not be prejudged. 
The first rule is in words to this effect : "No 
question shall be proposed to a witness, until 
after the consent of the moderator shall have 
been obtained." The second, in words to 
this effect : " All questions shall be in writ- 
ing." And, notwithstanding this my cause 
has been sedulously, and, as I have power- 
ful reasons to believe, by previous consent 
between several members of this presbytery, 
substituted in the place of Mr. Chester's. 

There are many other grievances which I 
have not time to state, more particularly re- 
ferring to the different manner in which my 
friends and those of Mr. Chester's, have been 
treated, while under examination as witness- 
es. 

In a review of every transaction of this 
presbytery, which has fallen under my ob- 
servation, touching Mr. Chester's trial, lean- 
not do otherwise than deliberately, and sol- 
emnly, to protest against the past proceed- 
ings ; and demand as an act of common jus- 
tice, that the trial be entered upon de novo, 
and conducted in a spirit of equity and sound 
order ; and that this, my protest, together 
with all these written observations, be, in its 
proper place, entered on the minutes of the 
presbytery. Hooper dimming." 

Read as amended; 



The moderator said he had no objection to !VIr - J h . es ; 

M •' . tor's Trial. 

r. dimming s statement just read, going v^^/ 

on the record; this was a privilege he was id charge. 
willing to allow : not the less so, because his 
own opinions and acts had, in the document M ° dera *- 
presented, been made a subject of animad- l0 the re- 
version. If any thing said or done by him, c P ril ^ V g f 
should ultimately appear to have been said 
or ('one in error, he should deeply regret it ; 
and in the mean time gave it as his opinion, 
that the records which would perpetuate those 
opinions and acts supposed to be injurious, 
should also perpetuate the proffered antidote, 
and he only claimed the privilege of thereaf- 
ter subjoining such explanatory remarks and 
documents, as would, he hoped, do away 
in Mr. Cu coming's mind, his principal ob- 
jection. 

Mr. dimming requested to make some 
corrections in the document he had read, be- 
fore it should be recorded. Whereupon, it 
was Resolved, that the same be returned to 
him for the purpose of his amending it, by al- 
tering any part of it, or by adding to it, at 
his discretion, so as to comprehend any other 
remarks which he may consider necessary in 
the further progress of the trial. 

As the court were about to proceed to the Mr. Cum- 
examination of the remaining witnesses of the ™' in f ob * 
defendant, Mr. Cumming again objected, Si's pro- 
and having moved a resolution in the words ceedin §- 
following : " Resolved, that the trial of Mr. 
Chester be commenced de novo, and con- 
ducted in a manner which shall not implicate 
the characters either of Mr. Tucker or Mr. 
Cumming," demanded liberty to speak to the 
same. Liberty was granted, and he spoke 
to it accordingly. 



V>4 

Dr. Blatchford moved the following reso- 
lution : 

2d charge. Whereas a particular interest is felt by the 
Rev. Hooper Gumming, and Messrs. Eaton 
Dr.Biatch- (3J ranam an( \ L ucas ^ commissioners on the 
solution, part of the 3d Presbyterian church, in the 
progress and issue of this trial ; therefore, 
resolved, that the above-named persons be at 
liberty to take their seats with Mr. Cumming, 
and assist him, and, through him, propose any 
question which they may deem necessary; 
which was unanimously adopted. 

The court were again about to proceed to 
Mr. Cum- the examination of the defendant's witnesses, 
le'^inesto when Mr. Cumming rose and said, that it was 
withdraw, evident, he could not obtain justice in this 
judicatory; that it was useless for him to 
waste his health, and have his spirits depress- 
ed ; that he did not say, he would decline his 
seat on this floor ; but that, in the exercise 
of a right common to every member of pres- 
bytery, he asked leave to withdraw for the 
present 
The mode- The moderator afterwards added, that it 
ptahi/fnd would have been unconstitutional to have en- 
vindicates tered on Mr. Chester's trial with closed doors ; 
pursed" by * na ^ & was Mr. Cumming's commissioners 
the court, that gave his name as a witness ; that it was 
the constitution that excluded witnesses not 
yet sworn, while another witness was under 
examination; an inconvenience to which the 
other members of presbytery were subjected ; 
that Mr. Cumming was so placed on the list 
of witnesses, as to be called at a very early 
period of the trial ; and that he never was 
excluded from presbytery one moment after 
he first entered it. The moderator thought 
that the explanation given by the committee, 
must have escaped Mr. Cumming's recollec- 



S5 

tion, or it would have been deemed satisfac- JJ r r ; g .fjljj" 
tory. He adverted to the record, to recall s^y^s 
the transaction, which was in the words fol- 2J Chaise, 
lowing. " Mr. Cumming appeared in pres- 
bytery, and stated, that he had been unavoid- J^jji*? 
ably prevented from appearing sooner: — that an.ivindi- 
he had supposed presbytery were sitting with JJJJJ^J,,. 
closed doors: — that he had providentially sued by the 
been informed that they were suffering his comt ' 
character to be publickly assailed, and he 
came to claim his seat as a member, and to 
demand that the proceedings be arrested ; 
and that the moderator give him a statement 
of all that had been done from the opening 
of presbytery until that time. The moderator 
declined doing this ; but decided that the 
clerk should read to Mr. Cumming the tes- 
timony taken. This decision was objected 
to, on the ground that Mr. Cumming was 
himself a witness, and could not, according 
to the constitution, hear the previous testi- 
mony, until he had himself been sworn. 
The objection was deemed insurmountable 
by the moderator, who thereupon reversed his 
decision, giving it, however, as his opinion, 
that the request of Mr. Cumming ought to 
be granted, as soon as it could be constitu- 
tionally done. 

" Mr. Cumming then stated, that he ought 
to be forthwith called as a witness ; that it 
was very important to his character to be 
present during Mr. Marvin's examination ; 
that he had not had the opportunity of cross- 
examining the preceding witnesses, and he 
wished, in the case of Mr. Marvin, to avail 
himself of that privilege. 

" Mr. Hutton, on the part of the committee 
for conducting the prosecution, stated that, 
in arranging the witnesses furnished them 



m 

urh Sat in this cause > thev nafJ placed Doct. Nott. 
v^v^a. first, because he was moderator ; Doct. 
2d Charge. Hos-ack next, because he was a member of 
presbytery ; that his own name had been 
Moderator placed next, because he was on the com- 

explains • » m _ 

and vindi- mittee tor conducting the prosecution ; and 
catesthe ^j. jy/j r Marvin hid been placed next, 

eourse pur- • 7 

suedby the because they were present together at the 
court. interview alluded to in the prosecution. 
Next to Mr. Marvin they had placed Mr. 
dimming, making him the fifth witness, 
instead of the ninth, as he stood on the list of 
witnesses furnished by Messrs. Eaton Graham 
and Lucas, Mr. Cumming's commissioners. 
" He could have wished Mr. dimming had 
been present at the opening of the trial. He 
knew no reason why he had not been. He 
supposed, at the time Mr dimming remain- 
ed absent out of delicacy ; but, whatever the 
cause might have been, the committee had 
done nothing to prevent, or to delay his ap- 
pearance in presbytery." 

The moderator added, it had been sug- 
gested that the committee for conducting the 
prosecution had consulted with Mr. Chester's 
counsel, in the formation of their interrogato- 
ries ; but, with whomsoever they had con- 
sulted, one thing would be apparent from a 
review of the trial, as far as it had proceeded, 
that they had sedulously avoided so much as 
touching on any point not immediately at 
issue. And it was agreeable to find by com- 
parison, that the form of questions which Mr. 
dimming says ought to have been adopted, 
is, in substance, and almost in terms," the 
very form which the committee had adopted, 
and that they had avoided, throughout, that 
form which Mr. dimming has condemned. 
If there be any one exception in which they 



m 

have asked any witness not " what do you **£ <£«£ 
know concerning the several charges," but s^/^/ 
-i what do you know concerning Mr. Cum- 2d charge, 
min£," it had escaped the notice of the 
moderator, and, he presumed, of the whole 
court. 

Rev Noah M Wells, one of the members ^'J^ 
of the committee, appointed to conduct the nivance 
trials of Mr. Chester and Mr. Tucker, was JJJ^f 
called and sworn. 

Moderator. Did Mr. Chester ever consult 
with Mr. Wells in regard to the management 
of this cause ? 
Witness. No, sir. 

Mod. Did Mr. Chester's counsel ever con- 
sult with you on that subject ? 
Witness. No, sir. 

Mr. Isaac Hutton, the other member of 
the committee was called. 

Mod. Have you had any consultation with, 
or direction from Mr. Chester's counsel, as 
to the formation of those questions, or the ar- 
rangement of those witnesses, as presented 
by you, in your formula of interrogatories at 
Mr. Chester's trial I 

Witness. I have had no interview with any 
body. 

Mr. Chester. Did Mr. Chester ever consult 
with Mr. Hutton, in regard to the manage- 
ment of this cause, except that Mr. Cumming 
should be placed as high as possible on the 
list of witnesses ; that Mr. Cumming might 
be present during the trial ? 

Wit. No, he never did ; the consultation 
referred to was not really such, but a com- 
mon conversation on the propriety and ne- 
cessity of putting Mr. Cumming in as early 
a place as possible. I had, two or three 
times, endeavored to ascertain the nature of 
13 



9S 

Mr » TrS" defence intended to be made by Mr. Chester, 
in order to judge of the mode of proceeding ; 



Charge but did not know the nature of his defence, 
until after the questions intended to be put, 
Enquiry as were proposed by the committee. I have 
n?vance 0n stated to Mr. Chester, my determination to 
ac V'r H ut ^ r# Gumming as near the head of the 
list of witnesses, in the order of examination, 
as possible ; but I have not had any consul- 
tation on the subject. 

Mod. Whom did you consult, as to the 
plan of trial, and the formula of questions, 
in the cause of the Rev. John Chester and 
Mr. Mark Tucker; and what was the ad- 
vice given you, as to the extent of truth which 
you were bound to bring out before the court, 
and the precise limits beyond which your 
interrogatories should not reach ? 
Wit. Doct. Nott, and none else. 
Mod. Have you Doct. Nott's opinion in 
writing, and, if so, will you produce it ? 
Wit- I have. 

Mr. Hutton then read Doct. Nott's opinion, 
in the words following : 
opinion 1 " It is incumbent on the committee, who 

previously are to conduct the prosecution a gainst Messrs. 
oTn'ou Chester and Tucker, to present to the court 
to i he all the evidence (in the possession of that 
appointed committee) of the truth of the charges on re- 
10 conduct cord against those individuals, and also, all 
toM" pro- tne evidence requisite for placing their con- 
per course duct, touching the points at issue, in a just 

!ued! P " r " tig* 1 *- So mucn truth as tms > though it 
should militate against third persons, is in- 
dispensible. So much therefore ought to be 
made to appear, and no more. It is within 
the knowledge of the committee who exam- 
ined the witnesses on the. information against 
Mr. Chester, that he admits that he has said 



99 

*omethinor of his own knowledge relative to Mr ; V i,es ; 
-Mr. Cumming's having preached at Milton \^y^/ 
from a sermon of Mr. Channing's. So far fci Charge, 
as concerns the truth of what Mr. Chester 
actually said, you are bound to enquire : w . r,Uen 

J .■'«_. . . | opinion 

because, without being informed whether previously 
what Mr. Chester has said, be true, or false, fj^jjj 
the court can neither ascertain his innocence, totbecom- 
nor the degree of his guilt. With Mr. Cum- j£j/g 
ming, however, in this trial, we have nothing conduct 
to do, and you will not interrogate any wit- Jjj®£ ,8l,w 
ness, as to the fact of Mr. Cumming's having mode to be 
preached Mr. Channing's sermon, but merely ,,ursued ' 
whether so much as Mr. Chester may have 
told concerning that sermon, is true. 

It is within the knowledge of the same com- 
mittee, that Mr. Chester admits that he h;»s 
said something concerning the intemperance 
of Mr. Cumming at Mr. Marvin's. As, how- 
ever, he is said to have given Mr. Marvin, at 
the time, as his author, in deciding on Mr. 
Chester's conduct, it is not needful for the 
court to know whether what Mr. Marvin told 
him, was true, or false; but merely, whether 
he told Mr. Tucker the same thing that Mr. 
Marvin told him, and no more ; you are 
bound to require Mr. Marvin to declare alt 
that he told Mr. Chester, but you are not 
bound to require him to testify to the truth of 
any part of it. With respect to other witness- 
es conversant with what transpired at Mr. 
Marvin's, you ought to enquire, not what 
they know concerning Mr. Cumming's in- 
temperance; nor what Mr. Marvin may have 
told them ; but merely what they may have 
heard Mr. Marvin tell Mr. Chester, or in his 
presence. The Court only require to be in- 
formed what Mr. Marvin told Mr. Chester, 
and what Mr. Chester told Mr. Tucker, and 



UoTC, 



too 

Mr ; £ h .*V the circumstances of the telling, to put them 

tar's I ml. . c ... fe '. . r „ 

^^y^s in possession or every thing requisite, as tar 
2d Charge, as I can see, for a righteous decision. Short 
of this, you may not stop ; beyond it, you 
ought not to go." 

Over the ground on which Mr. Chester 
Moderator nas cn0 sen to ptace his defence, the court 
to explain have not the same controul. His trial has 
andvindi- originated in an information filed by Messrs. 
course par- Eaton, Graham and Lucas ; and two of the 
«ued by the charges preferred against, him, were for slan- 
dering Mr. dimming. Mr. Chester, in plead- 
ing to these charges, had claimed to give the 
truth in evidence ; a claim not to be disput- 
ed, because it is not to be disputed that he 
had, both according to usage and to law, a 
right to do so ; the exercise of which right 
had put the character of Mr. Gumming indi- 
rectly at issue, so far as the alleged slanders 
of Mr. Chester were concerned. Nor could 
the moderator conceive by what new form of 
process, were the trial commenced de novo, 
as was recommended, Mr. Gumming sup- 
posed Mr. Chester could be tried for slander- 
ing him, without trying the question whether 
what Mr. Chester had said concerning him, 
were slander, or not. If it were slander, still 
its truth or falsehood must vary its malignity, 
and the court, that would refuse to consider 
so material a circumstance, would, when the 
calm of reason returned, be deemed neither 
a court of equity nor justice. 

With respect to intemperance, it was true, 
that Mr. Cumming had not been impeached 
for that crime, before this court ; but it was 
no less true that Mr. Chester had been im- 
peached for the crime of slanderingMr.Cum- 
ming in that respect ; or, in the words of the 
impeachment, for making a charge of intoxi- 



101 

cation agatnst htm. Now, if Mr. Chester Mr ; £ h "" 
had made this charge, he had an undoubted .^ ^' 
right to prove it, and the court would be 2d Charge. 
bound to take that proof into the account, in 
making up their judgment. It was strange Mod . erator 
that it could have been expected that any t explain 
person could be tried for making a charge, "•JjL^jjJ*" 
without being allowed to show the truth of course pur- 
the charge that had been made Would it s c "^ t bytb " 
be said that, when a minister of the gospel 
spoke ill of his brother, the truth or falsehood 
of what he said, made no difference in the 
moral character of the action '? But, that Mr. 
Chester made this charge, he has not admit- 
ted. On the contrary, he has pleaded that, 
so far as it has been made at all, Mr. Mar- 
vin made it. Now, surely, Mr. dimming 
himself will not, on reflection, wish that Mr. 
Chester should be compelled to lie under the 
imputation of making a charge, which, in 
truth, he did not make. And if, as Mr. Mar- 
vin has sworn, he told Mr. Chester what Mr. 
Chester told Mr. Tucker, why should it have 
been denied to Mr. Chester to show that Mr. 
Marvin had told him this, which is all that 
was allowed to be shown. The question put 
to Mr. Marvin, being not, " What do you 
know concerning the Rev. H. Cumming's in- 
temperance :" but, " What did you tell the 
Rev. John Chester concerning it ?'" His an- 
swer was, " 1 told him that I had satisfied 
myself with my own eyes, and the observation 
of my family and some of Mr. Cumming's 
friends, that Mr. Cumming had made so free 
a use of ardent spirits, as not to be himself ; 
or, out of his right mind." 

If Mr. Chester has since been allowed to 
put to witnesses interrogatories of a different 
character, it will be remembered that it was 



10£ 

B4r ; £ he 5" not till Mr. Cumroinghad undertaken to dis~ 
'Igr-.-m.' crecn t the testimony of Capt. Marvin ; and 
2d Charge, thereby invested Mr. Chester with the right 
of restoring the credit of the same ; and no- 
Moderator thing could more effectually restore the cre- 
toexpuiu dit of Mr. Marvin's testimony which related 
cate'the di - to the fact of telling Mr. Chester, than to the 
course pur- calling of the persons to whom he appealed 
sued by the t testify as to the trsith of the matter told. 
And, besides, after Mr. Chester had consent- 
ed to the introduction of Mr. Duncan, to dis- 
credit C apt. Marvin, (which, by the consti- 
tution, he could have prevented) and especi- 
ally as he consented under an assurance that 
the truth of what the witness had said was 
to be put at issue, the court could not now 
refuse it. Stipulations made in open court, in 
strictness of morality, as well as technically, 
held the parties. Mr. dimming having 
availed himself of Mr. Duncan's testimony, 
and, also, of Mr. Lucas' to the same point, 
must not now refuse to Mr. Chester, the ad- 
vantages of countervailing testimony. 

With respect to the cross-examination of 
the three individuals sworn before Mr. dim- 
ming came into Court, it was known that, 
the first time it was suggested, the moderator 
decided that the request should be granted, 
and the decision was on record. The only- 
reason that it had hitherto been waved, was 
that the court were occupied, and there were 
witnesses in waiting, who could not. without 
great personal inconvenience, be detained. 
The privilege, however, remained, and Mr. 
dimming might avail himself of it, at any 
time before the trial closed. 

Mr. Cumming had truly stated the reason 
which the moderator assigned for one of the 
rules of order heretofore adopted. It was, 



103 

however, within the knowledge of the court, Mr ; £hn* 

tGl S i I'lii ' 

that Mr. Cummins: differed from the moder- 



ator concerning: that rule of order, assigning sa Charge 
as a reason, that it infringed the constitutional 
privilege of the accused, and he forewarned Moderator 
the presbytery, that when, on his own trial, to explain 
he should claim the right of asking any ques- and v i. Ddi " 

" •/ t. cate toe 

tion which he himself might think would course pur- 
tend to his exculpation ; to which extent Mr. m ^7 lLe 
Chester surely has not been indulged, his 
questions having been uniformly subjected to 
the judgment of the court, and in several 
instances, overruled. 

The moderator early foresaw how different it 
would be to keep the trials pending before this 
court, distinct. To secure this, however, as 
far as was practicable, he sketched that plan 
which has been exhibited. If the limits there- 
in fixed, had been transgressed, he trusted 
that Mr. dimming, after his present pertur- 
bation of mind was over, would not hold the 
moderator responsible for the transaction, 
since it had taken place, as far as he could 
recollect, in every instance, at Mr. Cumming's 
own particular request. It was Mr. dimming 
who proposed, that Mr. Smith should be ex- 
amined, as to any thing he might have heard 
Mr. Chester say, relative to Mr. Cumming's 
plagiarism, and that too, after the very ques- 
tion had been put to Mr. Smith, which Mr. 
dimming now thinks should alone have been 
put to any witness; and after Mr. Smith, in 
answer to which question, had declared, that 
he did not know any thing concerning the 
charges in question. It was Mr. Cumming 
who extended the range of enquiry, (when 
Mr. Warren and Mr. Eaton were under ex- 
amination) to a conversation about plagiarism 
generally ; and it was Mr. dimming who ex- 



104 

Ml '' Sn" ten( * e d tne enquiry, by the introduction of Mr, 
.^. ^' Duncan, beyond the fact of Mr. Marvin's 
2d Charge, having told Mr. Chester something about in- 
temperance, to the truth of what he told. In 
Moderator a j) these instances, Mr. Chester was opposed 
to^xpiain to extending the range of enquiry, and Mr. 
and vindi- Cumming in favour of it ; it appeared strange, 
course pur- therefore, that he should now be under the 
sued by the impression, that it had been done out of favor 
to Mr. Chester. The moderator supposed, 
at the time, that Mr. Cumming had claimed 
it as a privilege due unto himself. 

The moderator trusted presbytery were as 
sensible as Mr. Cumming could be, that he 
was not now under trial, and that they had 
no right to pre-judge his cause. He thought, 
however, that Mr. Cumming would admit 
that they had as little right to pre-judge the 
cause of that brother who was upon trial, and 
who, (though he should, ultimately, be found 
the actual criminal at the bar) still had rights 
which ought to be respected, by those who 
sat in judgment on him ; for the constitution 
under which they sat, imperatively said in his 
behalf, the trial shall be open, fair, and im- 
partial, and the accused shall be permitted to 
ask any questions tending to his own exculpa- 
tion. If, therefore, it be a fault that Mr. 
Chester has been allowed to ask such ques- 
tions, Mr. Cumming, on reflection, would 
perceive that it was not the fault of presbyte- 
ry, but, of the constitution. It ought to have 
been foreseen that if Mr. Chester was to be 
tried at all, that he must be tried constitu- 
tionally. Mr. Chester has not placed him- 
self at the bar of the court; the court did not 
originate the information which had placed 
him there. If it had been deemed by the 
friends of Mr. Cumming that it be injurious 



10 him, tor Mr. Chester, when on his de- t Mi ;- SjJJ* 
fence, to gtve the truth in evidence, they . ^1 ^V 
ought not to have preferred those charges, 2d charge. 
from the very nature of which it became the 
duty of the court to allow him to do so; for 3r ° (,erator 
it could not be denied, without manifest in- to explain 
justice, to the accused on trial, to exculpate J° t d e v t £ e di * 
himself, lest his exculpation should militate course pur- 
against the individual in whose behalf the ^. t bythe 
accusation at issue had been preferred. 

Mr. Gumming thinks he ought to have 
been admitted aa a witness. The court had 
decided differently ; and the moderator, at 
the time, doubted whether, on the ground of 
mere interest in the cause, which was the 
only ground taken, Mr. dimming was, in 
strictness of law, incompetent on all the 
charges ; and though he could have wished a 
change in the terms in which Mr. Chester's 
evceptions were stated, still there were ob- 
jections which, had they been made, would, 
in his mind,h ive been altogether insurmount- 
able. For there was no sounder canon than 
that, " Accusers, persons at enmity with the 
accused, persons under censure, or process 
for censure, cannot be admitted as witnesses, 
either for or against an offender." 

That Mr. Gumming had an indirect inter- 
est in the issue of this cause, was not, after 
what had transpired, to be disputed, and it 
was certainlv not to be disputed that, at the 
time he was rejected as a witness, he was him- 
self under process for censure, and that too for 
deliberate falsehood, than which, till it was wip- 
ed away, no charge could be urged with great- 
er reason against his admission as a witness. 

Mr. Cumming seems to think that it was 
inconsistent, having rejected him, to allow 
Mr. Tucker, " deeply involved as he is in 
the charges against Mr. Chester," to be 
sworn. It is to be regretted that this wast 
14 



106 

Mr. cbes- no t mentioned at the time. Mr. Tucker was 
l " a witness named by Mr. Cumming's corn- 



ed Charge, missioners. When he was called, the ques- 
tion of his competency was suggested by a 
Moderator me mber of the court. But he was not ob- 
toexp'iain jected to by either party, and was therefore 
and vii.di- sworn of course ; and had he been rejected, 
course pur- to say nothing of the singularity of rejecting a 
sued by the witness, against whom no objection had been 
raised, it may be doubted whether Mr. Gum- 
ming would have commended the impartiality 
of such rejection, inasmuch as it was in a 
conversation with this same Mr. Tucker, that 
Mr. Chester was said to have slandered Mr. 
Gumming relative to intemperance, and in- 
asmuch as the informers had no other so im- 
portant witness to produce (the conversation 
being private) to substantiate their charge 
against Mr. Chester. 

Mr. Gumming has stated specifically and 
in detail, what he now considers to be " in 
fact, the points at issue in Mr. Chester's case.'' 
It will be seen by comparison, that the points 
now stated differ somewhat from the charges 
originally made out and on record. Those 
charges, however, it is intimated, were art- 
fully drawn. This might have been the case. 
Still, however, Mr. dimming, on reflection, 
must remember, what was now in evidence, 
before the court, that the charges, both in 
the case of Mr. Chester and Mr. Tucker, 
were originally presented by Messrs. Eaton, 
Graham and Lucas, Mr. Cumming's com- 
missioners, and that, after they had been 
reported to presbytery unaltered, except to 
insert the names of persons and places, which 
was done in Mr. Cumming'spresence, and, as 
he stated the same to be, these charges were 
again recommitted to be amended, and were 
amended and enlarged by the direction and 
in the very words of Mr. Cumming himself. 



,. 



Camming. 



itrious cireula- 
nming, to wit : 
Mr. (.'Manning's. 
, a charge of In- 
l". Marvin ; and 
e presence of U. 

Ifosack and Mr. 
and l T . Marvin, 
fee that he told 
►iarvin told him 



reports against 
's, and preach- 

ts his author of 

iming and Pro- 
he made to the 
larvin business, 

■d very abusive 
vhich'Mr. Mar- 

J»per Cumming, 
IM. Bliss, 
om Mr. Cum- 
ins elders, by 

7. H. Cumming 
wife ; also to 
imuel S.Davis, 



tnst Mr. Ches-ttr, S 



T\\fe joints uonv said to 

^Niv. i"\i\\u\\iiig to "be t\\e 

joints at issue. 



I. An industrious circulation or' report? 
injurious to the character of Mr. Cum- 
ming. 

II. Slandering Mr. Cuinmiug in a con- 
versation with Mr. Tucker. 

III. Falsehood in denying, that he had 
told Mr. Tucker, any thing prejudicial to 
the moral character of Mr. Cumming. 

IV. Falsehood in contradicting tha J . 
denial. 



H 



Mr. Tucker, J 
\ 



i 



<j\iavges 

./> presented originally bij tlte inform- 
ers, Messrs. Eaton, Lucas and 
Graham. 



Cnavges 

Jis first reported by the committee. 



Cnavges 

Js amended and enlarged by the committee, at the instan 



of ,&-, Camming. 



} Common fame charges the Rev. J<i 
| Chester with the industrious circulation 



I. Common fame charges the Rev. 
John Chester with the industrious circu- 
lation of reports injurious to the charac- 
ter of the Rev. Hooper Cumming, to 
wit : preaching other people's sermons. 

Witnesses. Dr. Nott, Judge Thomp- 
son, Chester Bulkley, J. L. Winne, Uri- 
ah Marvin, Rev. H. Cumming, Mr. 
Swcctman, J. Boardman. 



II. Making a charge of intoxication 
urainst the Rev. H. Cumming ; and of 
falsehood in denying the same when 
charged therewith. 

Witnesses. Mark Tucker, Drs. Nott 
:nd Hosack, Mr. M'Crea, Mr. Marvin, 
I. Hutton, Rev. H. Cumming, Mr. Sweet- 
man, J. Boardman. 



Common fame charges the Rev. Mark 
1'ucker with falsehood, and the indus- 
trious circulation of reports against Mr. 
Cumming, to wit : Intoxication, and 
preaching other people's sermons. 

Witnesses. Thos. M'Auley, J. Crane 
J Lee, Rev. H. Cumming, E. Clarke 
George M'Quecn, N. Bassett, Rev.j! f 
Chester. * 



of reports inj 

Rev. Hooper Cumming, to wit 



the 



he character of 



I. Preaching at Milton, on the 11th 
Dec. 1816, a sermon of the Rev. Mr. 
Channing's. 

II. With making, when in conversa- 
tion with Mr. Mark Tucker, a charge of 
intoxication against the Rev. Hooper 
Cumming, at the house of U. Marvin, 
and with falsehood in denying the same, 
when charged therewith, in the presence 
of 17. Marvin and I. Hutton. 



I. Intoxication at Mr. U. Marvin's, 
and preaching other people's sermons. 



II. With falsehood, in asserting that 
the Rev. J. Chester was his author of the 
report of Mr. Cumming's intoxication at 
Mr. Marvin's. 



I. Common fame charges the Rev. John Chester with the industrious circula- 
tion of reports injurious to the character of the Rev. Hooper Cu mining, to wit : 
preaching at Milton, on the 11th Dec. 1816, a sermon of the Rev. Mr. Channing's. 

II. With making, when in conversation with Mr. Mark Tuckei , n charge of in- 
toxication against the Rev. Hooper Cumming, at the house of J. Marvin; and 

. with falsehood in denying the same when charged therewith in the presence of U. 
jj Marvin and I. Hutton. 

III. *With falsehood on his examination before Dr. Nott, Dr. Hosack and Mr. 
M'Crea, in Schenectady, relative to an interview with I. Hutton and U. Marvin, 
in Albany, 3d of January, 1817, viz. Telling the said committee that he told 
Mr. Cumming at the aforesaid interview in Albany, that Mr. Marvin told him 
that he saw Mr. Cumming drunk at his house. 

! Common fame charges Mr. Mark Tucker, 

I. With unchristian conduct, by an industrious circulation of reports against 
the Rev. Hooper Cumming, to wit : Intoxication at Mr. Marvin's, and preach- 
ing other people's sermons. 

II. *With falsehood in asserting that the Rev. John Chester was his author of 
5 the report of Mr. Cumming's intoxication at Mr. Marvin's. 

5 III. *With falsehood in an interview with the Rev. Mr. Cumming and Pro- 
i fessor M'Auley, at Schenectady, Jan. 2d, 1817, in a declaration he made to the 
| Rev.H. Cumming in the following words, to wit : " Except the Marvin business, 
J I never opened my lips against you," which was false. 

1st Specif. Because he had previously at Mr. Marvin's, used very abusive 
language relative to the character of the Rev. H. Cumming, for which Mr. Mar- 
vin had checked and reproved him. 

2d Specif. Because he had previously slandered the Rev. Hooper Cumming, 
in conversation with Dr. Coe, Dr. Burritt, Mr. Kellogg and Wm. M. Bliss. 

Sd Specif. Because he had previously endeavoured to detach from Mr. Cum- 
ming, the affections of Jonathan Crane and Samuel Lee, two of his elders, by 
calumniating him. 

4th Specif. Because he had spoken reproachfully of the Rev. H. Cumming 
relative to his drunkenness and plagiarism, to Mr. John Piatt and wife ; also to 
Elam Clarke and Stephen Crosby ; also to Benjamin B. Wisner, Samuel S.Davis, 
Professor M'Auley, and the widow of William J. Teller. 

Rev. Thomas Hallitlay, was called anil sworn. 

Pres. At whose instance, anil by whose direction was the lliird charge against Mr. Chester 
inserted in the report of the coinmitle? 

Wit. Tbe Rev. Hooper Cumming's. 

Pres. At whose instance, and by whose direction was the last charge agiinst Mr. Tucker, 
and the several specifications under it, ir 

Wit. The Rev. Hooper 



T\\fe -points uo-w said "b-y 

Ms. Cumming to \jc t\\e 

-points at issue . 



injurious to the character of Mr. 
ming. 



III. Falsehood in denying, that he had 
told Mr. Tucker, any thing prejudicial to 
the moral character of Mr. Cumming. 



inserted in the report of the 



» Omil 



l the report of the 



! 15, for the sake of 'brevity. 



10"l 

Although presbytery did proceed to the tri- Mr ; £ hes ' 
al of the Rev. J. Chester, when the hourap- v^^^ 
pointed for it arrived, it was known to Mr. 2d Charge. 
Cumming that the moderator, in conjunction 
with Capt. Bosworth, the friend of Mr. Cum- Moderator 
ming, did endeavor to bring about a volun- tolxpJain 
tarv settlement, and thereby prevent the ne- andvindi * 

■ •. P i t i i. • i /\ ca te the 

cessity ot any publick trial. Overtures were course pur- 
made to the moderater by Captain Bosworth, suedbytbe 
and were said to have been acceded to by 
Mr. Cumming, which the moderator acceded 
to, and had progressed far in obtaining the 
acquiescence of the other persons concerned, 
when he was arrested in his endeavours to 
consummate the intended settlement, by a 
communication from Capt. Bosworth, that 
Mr. Cumming had altered his mind. Again 
the settlement was undertaken, and again 
abandoned for the same reason, as Captain 
Bosworth informed him, and which was the 
only reason of its abandonment, so far as he 
had yet learned. 

As to the opinion expressed by the moder- 
ator of Mr. Cumming's derangement, he had 
nothing to add except that this was done at 
the request of Capt. Bosworth, and that it 
was known to himself at the time ; that the 
same opinion was entertained by Mr. Cum- 
ming's own father, and by his brother, his 
family physician, and several of his most in- 
timate friends; and he did not doubt they 
would appreciate the motive that prompted 
him to make this known. 

It was a source of deep regret to the mod- 
erator, to have been placed in a situation in. 
which he had been obliged to say or do any- 
thing, that Mr. Cumming should deem in- 
jurious, and he had extended these extra-ju- 
dicial remarks further than he otherwise 



108 

ter's Trial sn0U M' m tne no P e t nat they might ultimate- 
v^y^z ly tend to remove that delusion which seemed 
2d charge, to have taken possession of his mind, both 
with respect to the acts of the moderator, and 
Moderator a i so f tne presbytery, and which, he still 

continues . «. • 1 1 i • 1 • 

to explain trusted would vanish, when a more lucid ui- 
and vindi- terva i should return. 

cate the _, • • /» rn r r» ? 

course pur- Examination <>J Lapt. L. Bosworth, sworn 
sued by the on the part of tne defendant. 

court. l , _ . . 

Mr. Chester. Do you know any thing* of 
Testimony Mr. Cumming's intemperance at Capt. Mar- 

of Capt.L. y j n ' s <l 

Witness. Mr. Marvin asked me, if I did 
not think Mr. dimming* drank too much. I 
told him I was afraid he did ; I had observed 
it at Mr. Marvin's bouse. 

Capt. Bosworth then presented a written 
statement, which he thought it his duty to 
communicate. 

After the moderator had read the same, 
which was put into his hands by Capt. Bos- 
worth, he observed, " That though what was 
therein contained could not be received as ev- 
idence on the charges against the Rev. John 
Chester, still it had generally a bearing on 
an incidental question brought up by a do- 
cument introduced during this trial by the 
Rev. Hooper dimming, and which was now 
on record, complaining of the moderator to 
presbytery for having intimated an opinion 
that Mr. Gumming was not altogether sane ; 
and that after the statement of Capt. Bos- 
worth was read, he should claim the right to 
interrogate him as to the facts within his 
knowledge, that led the moderator to make 
the intimation alluded to 

Capt. Bosworth then proceeded : " The 
following is a narrative of the Rev. Hooper 
Gumming, who was suspended from the rain- 



stmionv 



isterial utiice, from theiid presbyteriau church M ** £**«- 
in Newark, in the full of 181-1, for partial .^ J^l 
derangement. It was the opinion of the Rev. u charge 
Hooper Cummings father, Doct. James Lee, 
and several ministers in presbytery, that he Te5 
was partialis- deranged, and I did consider 
hi:ii so myself. In the spring of 1815, I saw 
Mr. Cumming in New-York, on my way to 
Albany, and thought him to be better. I 
went to Schenectady, and had an interview 
with Dr. Nott, and mentioned Mr. Cum- 
in ing's delicate state of mind and standing ; 
and suggested to Dr. Nott, that I believed 
it would do him good to make a visit toSche- 
nectady, and he believed it would ; and I 
had better bring him along on my next trip 
to Albany ; it would do him no hurl, if it did 
not do him any good, a revival of religion 
being at that place at that time. On my re- 
turn to Newark, I asked Mr. Cumming if he 
would go to Schenectady with me and see 
Dr. Nott, which he consented to. But his 
parents refused, until they understood it was 
the opinion of Dr. Nott, and Dr. James Lee ; 
that it would do him ^ood, they consented 
that he might go. When I came to Albany 
I introduced him to Uriah Marvin and family, 
and stated to him in confidence, the delicate 
state of the mind of Mr. Cumming ; and al- 
so went to Schenectady and introduced him 
to Jonathan Price and family, and stated to 
him his delicate state of mind and standing : 
and then went to the college and introduced 
him to Dr. Nott, as before stated. On his 
passage from Newark to Albany, he behaved 
with a great deal of propriety, and with the 
gravity and dignity of a minister. A short 
time after my return, the presbytery set, and 
called for me as a witness. I stated to them 



110 

Mr. ches- n i s behaviour on the passage to Albany. The 
presbytery then, after hearing some other 



2d Charge witnesses, gave liberty for Mr. Cn mining to 
preach in the bounds of the presbytery of Al- 

Testimony. bany, and sent him to the care of Dr. Nott, 
and their proceedings, with the entire confi- 
dence that Dr. Nott would take care of him, 
and that he would write to them in their next 
sitting, of his conduct. During the summer 
season, presbytery of New-Jersey set, and 
Doct. Nott wrote a short letter to them, and 
Mr. J. Price came to Newark with Mr. 
dimming, with a call for him to preach in 
Schenectady. Mr. dimming applied for 
a dismission from the presbytery of Jersey ; 
it was granted. Mr. Cumming's friends had 
the entire confidence that Doct. Nott would 
be a father to him, especially his parents. 
Doct. Nott was written to be a father to him, 
by his friends ; and Mr. Cumming was 
directed to go to Doct. Nott for counsel, and I 
believe he did, for he told me that Doct. Nott 
was a father to him ; and I heard him ask 
Doct. Nott, if he would give counsel, and 
what hours in the day he might come. 
Doct. Nott told him, " come whenever he 
wanted to ; at any time he was ready to give 
him his counsel." 

In the spring 1816, Mr. Cumming and 
wife came to Newark, to see their parents and 
friends, and was discovered not to have his 
right mind, in preaching a preparatory lecture 
for Doct. Griffin, and I discovered it myself, 
and was very uneasy about it, and persuaded 
him and his wife to come to Albany with me 
in my sloop, as I had several passengers on 
heard, at that time, and some professors of 
religion, which I calculated would keep him 
steady on his passage up ; but he behaved 



Ill 

with a good deal of levity, so much so, that Ml - cl)e(r - 

*u l U JL * u x i ter's Trial. 

even the people where we went on shore, took ,^. ^, 
notice of it, and took him to be some young fop 2d Charge. 
of a lawyer, instead of a minister, as they told 
me afterwards ; and I told Mr. Marvin and T*timm/ 
family that he was not in his right mind, and 
to persuade him to stay at their house, while 
he staid in Albany, and not to visit much, 
which they did. Mr. Marvin asked me if 1 
did not think Mr. Cumming drank too much 
at these spells. I told him 1 was afraid he did, 
for I had noticed it myself that he had drank, 
some times, more than was prudent, but laid 
it to the state of his mind. I felt very uneasy 
about Mr. Gumming at that time, and I went 
to Schenectady to see Dr. Nott, and had an 
interview with him about Mr. Cumming, to 
see if he could not get a tour or mission for 
him, for I thought by travelling it might help 
his mind and settle it. But, afterwards, I 
understood, by my friends, in Schenectady, 
that Mr. Cumming was better, also, by 
Doct. Nott. I saw Mr. Cumming, sometime 
after, and had an interview, and 1 mentioned 
about his levity, and he said he was better, 
and spoke very feelingly, as though he knew 
he had been wrong Last fall I understood 
that the first presbyterian church in Albany, 
was about calling Mr. Cumming from Sche- 
nectady, and I searched into the thing, and 
found it was ; so ; and I informed his parents 
and friends of it, who were all very much op- 
posed to his coming to Albany, for they did 
not wish him to leave the care of Dr. Nott. 
His father said he had rather he would come 
home than to come to Albany. I was asked 
by several persons, about Mr. Cumming's 
character, and about preaching other men's 
sermon's ; which I said but very little about, 



112, 

Mr. Ches- except to the session of the church in Albany, 
^IJJ^' which I thought my duty, for I knew it was 
2d Charge, against the will of his parents and friends 
that he should come to Albany ; and I corn- 
Testimony, municated to Doct. Nott the same. Doct. 
Nott and myself told the session that it was 
not prudent to call Mr. dimming, under all 
circumstances, at present ; in consequence 
they did not. His parents and friends rested 
very easy, supposed he was doing very well 
in Schenectady, till he wrote to his father, 
that he had a call to the 3d presbyterian 
church in Albany, and then they were uneasy. 
Mr. Cumming's father wrote to him, that he 
must take the advice of Doct. Nott and his 
christian friends, before he accepted the call. 
His parents did not know he was in Albany, 
till a little before I sailed from Newark, and 
were very uneasy ; expected there was, or 
would be, trouble. And as soon as I got to 
Albany I saw Mr. Gumming was in such a 
state that he could not reflect on what he 
was doing, that his mind was not right ; I 
therefore advised with Doct. Nott, and gave 
him my opinion that it would not be prudent 
for him to take his oath ; not that he would 
swear wilfully wrong, but that he might 
without reflecting on all the circumstances. 
I have ever considered Mr. Cumming's 
moral character good. Lewis Bosworth" 



Capt. Bosworth's Examination continued. 
Did you, or did you not, introduce Mr. 
Cumming to Dr. Nott's acquaintance, and, 
in the name and at the request of Mr. Cum- 
ming's father, put him under his care ; and 
did you tell Doct. Nott, at the time, that Mr. 
Cumming was deranged in your opinion, and 
in the opinion of his father ? 



113 

I did. JUttS* 

Have you, or have vou not, been the con- 



tinual medium of communication between sa Charge. 

Dr. Nott and Mr. Cumming's father, ever 

since he has been at Schenectady 1 Testimony. 

I have. 

When you brought Mr. dimming from 
Jersey, after his vicit there from Schenectady, 
did you call on Dr. Nott, and request him to 
contrive some plan to get him on a mission, 
or, in some such way, remove him from his 
situation in Schenectady ? 

I did. 

Did you tell Dr. Nott, as the ground of 
this request, that he had been intemperate 
on his passage up with you ; and that when 
he had his deranged turns he would drink to 
excess ? 

I stated it so ; I did believe it. 

Did yon call on Dr. Nott, last fall, and in 
the name of Mr. Cumming's father, request 
Dr. Nott to interfere, and, if possible, pre- 
vent Mr. Cumming's going to Albany ? 

I did so. 

Did you tell Dr. Nott that Mr. Cumming's 
father said he would rather take his son 
home, than to have him go to Albany ; and 
that, if he went, he feared it would be his 
destruction ? 

Yes, sir. 

Did you not call on Dr. Nott now, as soon, 
as you could, after he came to this city, and 
beg him to try, if possible, to prevent Mr. 
Cumming's remaining in Albany, and to 
leave this and go down with you ? 

Yes, sir. 

Did you finally tell Dr. Nott that you was 
satisfied that Mr. Cumming was not now in 
his right mind, and did you beg Dr. Nott* 
15 



114 

Mr. cbes- no t to allow Mr. Cumming to take an oath ? 

ter's Trial, m, . . . ° 

^^^^ 1 hat was my opinion. 
2a charge. Are you a communicant in the church at 
Newark ? 

Testimony. Yes, Sir. 

Are you the intimate and confidential friend 
of Mr. Cu mining's father ? 

Yes, sir. 

All the testimony recorded under the sec- 
ond charge, having been read and consid- 
ered, The court unanimously decided, 

I. That it has not been made tut, on the 
Judgment part of the prosecution, that the Rev. John 
court* Chester did make, when in conversation with 

Mr. Mark Tucker, a charge of intoxication 
against the Rev. Hooper dimming, as is 
charged in this charge. 

II. That it has been made out, on the part 
of the defendant, that what he did tell Mr, 
Tucker, to wit : " That Marvin told him, that 
Mr. Gumming had been under the influence 
ofspiritous liquor, and so much so, that he 
considered it as imprudent for him to leave 
his housed was true. Whether, however, the 
dffence set up for having told Mr. Tucker 
this, to wit : That it was told in confidence 
by the defendant, and for the purpose if ob- 
taining further information and advice for the 
regulation of his future conduct, whether this 
defence amount to an entire justification, or 
not, depends, in some measure, on the know- 
ledge which the defendant had at the time, of 
Mr. Marvin's having discharged the previous 
duty, which, as a christian, he owed Mr. dim- 
ming, and of the success, or failure, with 
which it had been attended; circumstances 
which had not been adverted to, by the de- 
fendant, in his pleadings, and concerning 

which nothing had appeared in evidence. Ao- 



Mf M m, therefore, given to (he parties, and M £ ^g 
the COWTt teas opened for the receiving of tes- .^ ^i 

ttmony oil tk^Se pOtnU. 2<1 Charge. 

& Marvin. 

Mod Did you ever tell Mr. Chester, or 
not, that you had conversed with, and coun- Additional 
seled the Rev. Hooper Camming, on the 
-object of those levities, indiscretions, and 
irregularities in him, which you imputed to 
too free a use of spiritous liquor \ 

Wit. 1 do not remember that ever I did ; 
I might, or might not. 
/. Board man. 

Mr. Chester. Did you not hear Mr. Mar- 
vin say, in my presence, that he had convers- 
ed with Mr. Cumming, and, if so, what did 
he say .' 

WiK I did hear him say so, if I recollect, 
at different times ; and the answer from Mr. 
Gumming was, that you might as well un- 
dertake to stop the north-river, and turn it 
in a different course. 
C. Bulkley. 

Mr. Chester. Did you not hear Mr. Marvin 
say, in my presence, that he had conversed 
with Mr. Cumming ; and, if so, what did he 

Wit. I did ; that he had frequently con- 
versed with Mr. dimming ; and that the 
answer from Mr. Cumming was, that you 
might as well undertake to stop the north - 
river, and turn it in a different course. My 
impression is, it was before the rumour of 
Mr. Cummings intemperance, either in the 
last of October, or the first of November. 

The additional testimony taken and re- opinion ot 
corded under the second charge having been the court 
iead and considered ; the court were of 
opinion that the defence set up by the de- 



116 

SsTHai ^ enc ^ ant was good, and amounted to a justi- 
v^^^, fication. The moderator not being prepared 
2d Charge, to acquiesce in such a decision, wished for 
time to examine the testimony, before the 
judgment of the court was entered. Time 
was granted, and, having reduced his opinion 
to writing, he delivered the same in the 
words following : 
JKode ^ " Private offences are of two kinds. The 
ator. one where the offence is against an indi- 

vidual ; the other, where the knowledge of 
the offence is confined to an individual, or to 
a few individuals. The one receives its de- 
nomination from its object ; the other, from 
its privity. 

" An offence against an individual, though 
known to many, is still a private offence ; 
nor may the individual offended, tuke one 
step to bring the offender to a public trial, 
until the private and appointed means, for 
reclaiming bim, have been tried, and have 
failed, The christian law, on this point, is 
explicit and imperative. Matt. xvm. 15-17. 
•' Not the gaining the offender, by the 
offended, if the offence become notorious, 
will, however, prevent third persons from 
taking cognizance of the offence. The object 
of that cognizance, however, is not the re- 
claiming of the offender, but the making of 
the fact manifest to others, that he has been 
reclaimed. Where the interest of religion 
requires it, the confession of sin may be made 
as public as the knowledge of the sin con- 
fessed has become. 

" An offence against society, where the 
knowledge of the offence is confined to an 
individual, is a private offence ; and though 
offences of this sort do not appear to have 
been the precise object of the law referred to 



in 

in Matthew, still our duty, in relation to ™£ <£*• 
such offences, may. by fair analogy, be de- \^^^J 
duced from the provisions of that law. For 2,1 Charge. 
if the gaming of the offender, be a bar to the 
further promulgation of a private, personal MoJers ; 
offence, it should seem that the gaining ofion. 8opin 
the offender ought to be a bar to the further 
promulgation of a private offence, which is 
not personal. And if such an ofience be 
promulgated, after the offender has been 
gained, some good reason for such promul- 
gation, apart from the object of discipline, 
ought to be made apparent 

" The alleged imtemperance of Mr. Gum- 
ming, at Mr. Marvin's, though not a personal 
offence, wis, notwithstanding, a private 
offence, having occurred in retirement, and 
being known, at most, only to Mr. Marvin, 
his family and one or two confidential friends ; 
and, being a private offence, if Mr. Marvin 
had discharged his duty to Mr. Camming, 
and received satisfaction from him, then there 
remained no further duty for Mr. Chester to 
perform. Nor ought the knowledge of the 
transaction to have been communicated to 
Mr. Chester, or recommunicated by him 
(on the supposition that satisfaction had been 
given) unless some reason existed therefor, 
other than the duty which was owed to Mr. 
Cumming. To prevent the first church in 
Albany from making an erroneous choice of 
a pastor, is the reason alleged for Mr. Mar- 
vin's making the communication which he 
did. This is a good and sufficient reason for 
Mr. Marvin, and it would be a good and 
sufficient reason for Mr. Chester, so far as 
respected any confidential communication, 
which he might have made to members of 
the first church in Albany. But it was not 



lift 

Mr. (.lies- i auv member of the first church in Albany, 
\ e ^. !^j but to Mr. Tucker, a licentiate, residing in 
2d Charge. Schenectady, that the communication was 
made by Mr. Chester, and the reason for 
Modera- making it, is alleged to have been the ob- 
orsopm- ^ am j n g p information and counsel for the 
regulation of his conduct. Now, if Mr. Cum* 
ming, having been admonished by Mr. Mar- 
vin, had already become repentant and re- 
formed, Mr. Chester had no occasion for the 
information, or counsel sought, and, of course, 
no right to make the communication he did, 
to Mr. Tucker, when seeking it. Nor could 
any duty Mr. Chester owed Mr. Gumming, 
render it needful for him to consult or com- 
municate with Mr. Tucker, relative to what 
had occurred at Mr. Marvin's, until he had 
first ascertained that Mr. Marvin had neg- 
lected his duty to Mr. dimming, or that, 
having performed it, the performance had 
been unsuccessful. The ascertainment of 
either the one or the other of these facts, 
would alter the situation of Mr. Chester ; for, 
if he had become possessed of information that 
Mr. Cumming was living in sin, and had 
not been reproved, or, having been reproved, 
had not repented, then, indeed, there had 
devolved on him, unsought, a painful and 
difficult duty to perform ; before he entered 
on which performance, he might wish for 
further information, as well as for counsel 
and advice with respect to his own duty, 
arising out of the information already pos- 
sessed ; and if he did wish for this, he had a 
right to seek it from any christian man in 
whom he placed confidence, and, especially, 
from any christian minister. .Whether the 
individual consulted, was selected with dis- 
cretion, or whether that individual made a 



prudent, or an imprudent use of the trust ? r '/ 5 1 !"- 

' ..... r • . ter's 1 rial. 

reposed in him, is not now the question ; -^n^^ 
bnt whether Mr. Chester had a right, at that 2d Charge. 
time, and for the reason assigned, to make 
the communication. That ricrht I conceive Mo / ,pra ; 

, . 111 toi'sopm- 

has not yet been made out, because the pre- ion. 
vious duty of Mr. Chester, out of which only 
the right in question is supposed to spring, 
has not been made out. 

" It has indeed been shown to the court, 
by Messrs. Bulklcy and Board man, that 
when Mr. Marvin communicated to the el- 
ders of Mr. Chester's church, the information 
of Mr. Cumming's alleged intemperance at 
his house, that he also communicated (Mr. 
Chester being present) the information of his 
having repeatedly expostulated with Mr. 
Gumming, to no purpose; and the time when 
this communication was made to the ciders 
of Mr. Chester's church, is ascertained with 
tolerable accuracy. It appears however from 
the admission of Mr. Chester, that Mr. Mar- 
vin had previously communicated to him the 
alleged fact of Mr. Cumming's intemperance; 
but, whether Mr. Marvin also communicat- 
ed, at that time, to Mr. Chester, the alleged 
fact of his own ineffectual admonition of Mr. 
dimming, Mr. Marvin declares, on oath, 
that he does not remember ; and the court 
therefore have no evidence that he did. Now 
whether Mr. Chester communicated to Mr. 
Tucker the account he had received of Mr. 
Cumming's intemperance, before, or after, 
the communication made by Mr. Marvin to 
Mr. Chester's elders, and in his presence, 
has not been ascertained ; and yet the ascer- 
tainment of this is of consequence in making 
a decision. Mr. Tucker has been in court 
and could be again called ; and if it should 



120 

f'i Si a Pl" >€ar that *he communication of Mr. Ches- 
ter to him was after, and not before, Mr. 



2d charge. Marvin's communication to Mr. Chester, of 
his own repeated and ineffectual endeavours 
STV to rec ^ a ^ m Mr. Cumming, then Mr. Chester's 
ion. " defence will be complete ; for it is not to be 
disputed, if the information communicated by 
Mr. Marvin to Mr Chester, was of such a 
nature as to impose upon him the perform- 
ance of any duty to Mr. Gumming, that he 
had a right to make such communications, 
and take such counsel as was deemed requi- 
site for the due performance of the duty thus 
imposed." 

The objections, stated in the opinion of 
the moderator, having been considered, and 
notice being given to the parties, the court 
was again opened for the taking of Mr. Tuck- 
er's testimony on this point. 
Mr. Tucker. 
Additional About what time did Mr. Chester make 
testimony, the communication respecting Mr. Cum- 
ming's intemperance at Mr. Marvin's ? 

As nearly as I recollect, it was about the 
middle, or last of November ; I think the 
last of November. 

The additional testimony of Mr. Tucker, 
taken and recorded under the second charge, 
having been read and considered, the court 
unanimously decided, 

III. That the defence set up for having told 
Judgment Mr rp ucker w i at frf r Marvin had said rela- 
court. five to Mr. Cumming' s intemperance at his 
house, to wit : That it was told by the de- 
fendant in confidence, and for the purpose of 
obtaining further information and advice for 
the regulation of his future conduct, uas a 
good and sufficient defence, amounting, alike 
inequity and law, to a justification. 



121 

Inasmuch as there had been an entire Mr - £ he$ " 

„ ., , j, » ters Trial. 

fad n re, on the part of the prosecution, to s^^/^/ 
establish against the defendant, the making a 2d Charge. 
charge of intoxication against the Kev. Hooper 
Gumming, the court unanimously decided, Judgment 

1 V. That the charge of falsehood, for deny- C0U rt. 
tug the same, having nothing to support it, fell 
of course. 

THIRD CHARGE. 

Common fame charges the Rev. John Ches- Sd Char s e: 
ter, with falsehood on the examination at Sche- stimo 
nee tad y. before Doct. Nott, Doct. Hosack, 
and Mr. MCrea, relative to an interview 
with the Rev. Hooper Camming, I Hutton, 
and U. Marvin, in Albany, on the third of 
January I Si 7, to wit: Telling the said com- 
mittee, in Schenectady, that he told Mr. Cum- 
min g at the aforesaid interview in. Albany, that 
Mr. Marvin had told him, that he saw Mr. 
dimming drunk at his house. 

Dr. Nott, sworn on the part of the prose- Dr N t , 

CUtion. testimony, 

Com. Did Mr. Chester say during his 
examination before the committee on J. L. 
Winne's resolution, that he told Mr. Cum- 
ming, at the aforesaid interview in Albany, 
that Mr. Marvin told him that he saw Mr. 
dimming drunk at his house ? 

Wit. Not in my hearing. 

Com. What did Mr. Chester say, during 
his examination before that committee, rela- 
tive to Mr. Cumming's intemperance at Mr. 
Marvin's ? 

Wit. The substance was this ; that Mr. 
Marvin told him that he had seen Mr. Cum- 
ming in such a state, from the improper use 
of liquor, as he supposed, that he did not like 
to permit him to go out of his house. Mr. 
Chester, in reply to Mr. Cumming's question, 
16 



jS Trial* said that he dic * not sa y that Mr - Marvin 

s^v^j told him that you was so drunk, but, that 

Sji charge, you was in such a situation from the improper 

use of liquor, as he supposed, that he did not 

Testimony. w j s ^ y 0n to g Q Qut Q f ^ Jj OUSe 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Was the committee on Mr. Whine's 
resolution, a confidential committee ? 

Wit. It was. 

Def. Did you communicate to any person, 
previously to the presenting the information 
against Mr. Chester, on Friday, what he said 
before the committee on Wednesday preced- 
ing ; if so, who was that person ? 

Wit. I did not to my knowledge. 

Def. When you called, with Mr. Kelly, 
on the commissioners, Messrs. Lucas, Eaton 
and Graham, at Given's, what reason did 
they assign for presenting the information 
against Mr. Chester ; and when, why, and 
by whom, did they say it had been deter- 
mined that it should be presented ? 

Wit. I do not know that I can answer 
distinctly. My impression is, that they spoke 
kindly of Mr. Chester, and one of them said, 
it was understood by our friends in Albany, 
that if Mr. Cumming's case was acted upon, 
Mr. Chester's would be also ; but that it was 
not finally determined, until, according to my 
impression, the last night, or the night before. 
But that if one was tried, the other would be 
also. 

Def. When the committee on the informa- 
lion against Mr. Chester, first met in Albany, 
February 27th, did any person inquire what 
Mr. Chester had said on his examination 
before the confidential committee, on Mr. 
Winne's resolution in Schenectady '? If so, 
who was that person, and what reason did 



iZ& 

he assign tor making that enquiry, and what ™*; £J"' 
answers did the committee give? y^^' 

W/. When the committee met in Albany, sd charge. 
Mr. Warren appeared, and asked me if Mr. 
Chester had not stated before that committee, Testimony 
that Mr. Marvin had told Mr. Chester, that 
Mr. dimming was drunk at his house. I 
told Mr. Warren that that committee was 
confidential, and that I did not feel at Liberty 
to state any thing respecting it. To this 
gentleman I added, that if he would go with 
me to Mr. Chester, I would answer it ; but 
not otherwise, as I considered it private. 
The reason Mr. Warren assigned, was that 
some person had told him that Mr. Chester 
had said before that committee, that Mr. 
Marvin told him that Mr. Curnming was 
drunk at his house. 

Def. Did thecommittee understand, atthis 
their first meeting, that previous to the pre- 
senting of the information against Mr. Ches- 
ter, it had become common fame in Albany, 
that he had told a falsehood on his examina- 
tion in Schenectady, before the committee on 
Mr. Winnes resolution ; and if so, from 
whom did they understand this ? 

Wit. The committee were informed by the 
commissioners, or some one of them, that it 
was common fame among their friends ; or 
words to that effect. 

Def. Did the committee, on this informa- 
tion against Mr. Chester, afterwards learn, 
from any other individual, or individuals, 
than the four already named, that, previously 
to the presenting of the information against 
Mr. Chester, it had become common fame, 
that Mr. Chester had told the falsehood al- 
luded to, before the committee on Mr, Win- 
ne's resolution in Schenectady ? 



Mr Ches- W it No they did not. 

ter's Trial. r\ /> r< 1 1 • «' i 

v^^^,^ /A7. *rom whose statement did the com- 

3d Charge, mittee, after their first report was recommit- 
ted, take this additional charge of falsehood 

Testimony. in i ^ e g^ re p 0r t ; and at whose instance 
was it afterwards amended into its present 
form ? 

Wit. On the statement of Mr. Cumming, 

^ , „ and at the instance of Mr. Cummins:. 

Doct. Ho- _ i /• « 

«ack's tes- Doct. Hosack, sworn on the part of the 
tioiony. prosecution. 

Com. Did Mr. Chester say, during his 
examination before the committee on Mr J. 
L. Winne's resolution, that he told Mr. Cum- 
ming, at the aforesaid interview in Albany, 
that Mr. Marvin told him that he saw Mr. 
Cumming drunk at his house ? 

Wit. He did not. He mentioned that Mr. 
Marvin had told him that he had seen Mr. 
Cumming in that situation, that he thought 
it prudent to keep liquor out of his way, and 
on another occasion, that he did not think fit 
to permit him to go out of his house. 
Cross Examination. 

Def. Was the committee on Mr. Winne's 
resolution, a confidential one ? 

Wit. I viewed it so. 

Def. Did you communicate to any person, 
previously to the presentment of the informa- 
tion against Mr. Chester on Friday, what he 
had said before the confidential committee on 
the Wednesday preceding ? If so, who was 
the person ? 

Wit. Not as I recollect. 

Dr. Willardy sworn on the part of the pro- 
secution. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this third charge ? 

Wit. I know nothing. 



125 

Mr. Ei ())ils, sworn on the part of the pro- JJjj g ,JJj* 
sedition. ^^~**j 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning sd Charge, 
this third charge '? 

Wit. Nothing. Testimony. 

By Mr. Gumming. Did not Mr. Chester, 
on a cert lin occasion, declare to you that he 
heard Mr. Cum ming preach, at Milton, the 
Rev. Mr Channings sermon? 

h it. He did not. 

Hon. Smith Thompson, sworn on the part 
of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
this third charge ? 

J I it. I do not. 

Hon. Chancellor Kent, Mr. Charles R. 
Webster, Mr. Th. V. W. Graham, Mr. 
Warren, and Mr. Stewart, sworn on the part 
of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing of this third 
charge ; if so, what do you know ? 

Wit. I know nothing. 

Mr. John MCrea, sworn on the part of the Mp « JM ' 

.• C'rea's tes- 

prosecution. tiraony . 

Com. Did Mr. Chester say, during the ex- 
amination before the committee on Mr. J. L. 
Winne's resolution, that he told Mr. Cum- 
ming, at the aforesaid interview in Albany, 
that Mr. Marvin told him that he saw Mr. 
Cumming drunk at his house ? 

Wit. I have no recollection that he said he 
was drunk. 

Com. What did Mr. Chester say, during 
his examination before that committee, rela- 
tive to Mr. Cumming's intemperance at Mr. 
Marvin's ? 

Wit. I think he said that Mr. Marvin said, 
that Mr. Cumming was in such a situation, in 
consequence of having used liquor, that he 



1^6 

3Ir ; 2\ es ,' thought it not prudent for him to go abroad. 

ter's Trial. ° A „ » 

.^^ ^i Cross Examination. 

3d Charge. /?£/*. Did you tell any person, that I had 
told a falsehood before that committee, of which 
Testimony. y 0U was a me mber ? 
H it. I did not. 

Mr jtb ^ r ' ^' ^' ^' ^ raaam -> sworn on the part 
Graham's of the defendant. 

testimony. jy (J j £) y OU know who reported in Albany, 
between Wednesday and Friday of the week 
presbytery sat in Schenectady, that Mr. 
Chester had told a falsehood before the com- 
mittee on Mr. Winne's resolution ? 

Wit. I do not particularly; it was a subject 
of general conversation. 

Def Was you in Albany between Tues- 
day and Friday ? 
Wit. I was 

Def. Did you hand the charges to the 
committee on Mr. Chester's case, in Albany? 
Wit. It was the act of the commissioners. 
Def. Did you arrange those charges and 
put them into the form in which the com- 
mittee received them ? 

Wit. It was the act of the commissioners. 
But I understood that it was not to be made 
use of, at all, except for the accommodation 
of the committee, and at their request. 

Examination of Mr. Eaton, sworn on the 
Mr. Ea- p ar t of the defendant. 
ton s^testi- jy^j. j^. ^ ^ Qu near ^ j^fore y 0ll signed the 

paper, containing information against Mr. 
Chester, that Mr. Chester told a falsehood to 
the committee appointed on Mr. Winne's 
resolution, which was appointed to inquire 
into the common fame report against Mr. 
dimming, which committee consisted of 
Docts, Nott and JHosack, and Mr. M'Crea 1 
Wit I did. 



12A 

Def. Who told you so ? Mr ; £»£ 

/ _ y . „ ter's Trial. 

Wit. It appears to me it was my colleagues, \^^*^> 
the other members of the commission. sa Charge. 

Mr. i'um. What was the ground-work of 
your application, as one of the commissioners Testimony 
on behalf of the 3d presbyterian church in 
this city, to the presbytery, for the appoint- 
ment of the committee, to investigate Mr. 
Chester's conduct ? 

Ji it It was from the reports abroad ; what 
I had from almost every mouth. 

Mr. Ctim. Did Mr. Chester, while attend- 
ing the presbytery in Schenectady, discover 
to you conduct indicative of a state of hosti- 
lity toward Mr. dimming ? If so, what was 
that conduct ? 

Hit. He did. The first part of Mr. Ches- 
ter's conduct appeared very sincere, until 
after Mr. Winne introduced his resolution. 
After this, we ascertained for a certainty, 
from his vote in presbytery, and his after 
conduct, that he was opposed to us, and en- 
deavoured, by introducing another subject, 
which I supposed was irrelevant, to frustrate 
our plans. Next morning after Mr. Winne 
introduced his resolution, at Mr. Given's, in 
Schenectady, Mr. Chester observed that Mr. 
Cum ming's conduct, in preaching other mens* 
sermons, was such that he did not think he 
should hesitate to make it public. 

Mr. Cum. Was not Mr. Chester's incon- 
sistent conduct, as you viewed it, relative to 
Mr. Cumming's settlement in Albany, the 
principal reason why you, as one of the com- 
missioners on behalf of the third church, 
applied to presbytery for the appointment of 
a committee to investigate his conduct? 

Wit. It was indeed, sir. 



13ft 

teV's Tri3" & e f- ^ 0W anc ' ty wnom was ^e subject 
\^vv of Mr. Cumming's conduct in preaching other 
3d Charge, men's sermons introduced ? 

Wit. I came in after it was introduced. 
Def. Who was present when this was said ? 
Wit. I believe Mr. Warren, Mr. Graham, 
Mr. Lucas, Mr. Fry, and Mr. Stimpson. 
ky' s M tesii- ^ r - M'Auley, sworn on the part of the de- 
mony. fendant. 

Def. Was you present before the commit- 
tee on Mr. Winne's resolution, when Mr. 
Chester was present ? 
If it. Yes, sir. 

Def Did you hear Mr. Chester state in 
the presence of that committee, what Mr. 
Marvin told Mr. Chester concerning Mr. 
Cumming's intemperance at his house ; and 
what Mr. Chester told Mr. Tucker; if so, 
what was the amount of what Mr. Chester 
said ? 

Hit. The amount of what Mr. Chester said, 
was, that Mr. Marvin had told him that he, 
Mr. Marvin, had seen Mr. dimming at his 
house, in a state unfit to go out; and that he, 
Mr. Marvin, had prevented him from going 
out, for fear of exposing himself. 

Def. Did you hear Mr. Gumming ask Mr. 
Chester, in the presence of that committee, 
whether Mr. Marvin told him that Mr. dim- 
ming was drunk, or intoxicated at his house ; 
if so, what was Mr. Chester's answer l 

Wit. His answer was, I think, that he had 
never used the word drunk, or intoxicated ; 
but he said, that he was in a state unfit to 
go out. 

Def. Did you, between the time Mr. Ches- 
ter and you were together before that com- 
mittee, on Mr. Winne's resolution, and the 
rising of the presbytery, tell any person what 



129 

Mr. Chester said before them to your hearing: Mr - £ hes - 

O y Jflp'q I rial 

an, | it. so, who was that person? >^ ^ J 

Wit. I do not remember having told any sa Charge, 
person. 

All the testimony, taken and recorded, un- 
der the third charge, having- been read and 
considered, the court unanimously decided. 

I. That the falsehood charged against the JJg me0t 
defendant, when on his examination before court. 
Docts Nott and Hosack, and Mr. M'Crea, 

had not been, on the part of the prosecu- 
tion, made out. On the contrary, the court 
unanimously decided, 

II. That it had been fully made out, on the 
part of the defendant, that this charge ivas 
itself a fa Iseh o ud. 

The court therefore, unanimously, acquit 
the Rev. John < hesler, of each and all the 
charges brought against him ; there having 
nothing appeared, during the whole trial, to 
impeach his integrity, or in the least to weaken 
their confidence in htm, either as a christian, 
or as a minister. And this court are con- 
strained to add, as the guardians of character 
and the supervisors of morals in their churches, 
that no justifiable cause, fin' the commencing 
of this prosecution, has appeared. 

The court are aware that an apology is 
suggested (in behalf of the informers on 
record against Mr. Chester, as well as in 
behalf of the committee who reported on their 
information,) in that previous clamour raised, 
and that factitious excitement given to a por- 
tion of community, by another process which 
had been already commenced. Still, however, 
individuals rights are sacred and ought never 
to be violated, or even to be put in jeopardy by 
judicial bodies, to satisfy the demand of popu- 
lar feeling. And this court cannot close the 
17 



130 

M ?»v k ," record of the present trial, without leaving on 

f^l J^J it their marked disapprobation, of all such 

groundless and vexatious prosecutions, which 

tend alike to the disturbing of individual 

peace, and the subversion of public morals. 

ALBANY, APRIL Wth, 1817. 

The trial of the Rev. John Chester being 
closed, the committee appointed to conduct 
the trial of Mr Mark Tucker, informed pres- 
bytery they were ready to proceed. Mr. 
Tucker stated that he also was ready. 

The stated clerk informed presbytery, that 
he had forwarded citations to all the witness- 
es whose names were on the list of witnesses 
supplied by the informers, as the same was 
handed him by the committee, viz. 
Witnesses. Rev. J. Chester, Rev. T.M'Auley, LL. D. 
Mr. Crane, Mr Lee, Mr. Hutton, Mr. Piatt, 
Mrs. Piatt, Mr. Wisner, Mr. Davis, Mr. 
Clark, Mr. Adams, Mr. Crosby, Mr. M'- 
Queen, Mr. Strong, Miss H. Peck, Miss L. 
Peck, Mr. Marvin, Mrs. Marvin, Mr. Basset, 
Mr. Duncan, Mr. Kent, Mr. Lucas, Mr. 
Johnson, Mr. Corning, Mr. Bliss, Mr. El- 
dridge, Dr. Burritt, Rev. Dr. Coe, Mr. Kel- 
logg. And that he had cited in behalf of 
Mr. Tucker and at his request, Mr. Scher- 
merhorn. 

The charges were then read to Mr. Tucker, 
after which the moderator addressed the 
court and the defendant on trial, in the words 
following : 

STa- " My Sret h ren > 

dress. " The trial on which we are now enter- 

ing, is of the same general character as the 
preceding trial, and must, during the inves- 
tigation, be governed by the same general 
principles ; but one thing occurs, in addition 



to what has already been said, deserving of Jt'^jj; 
notice. \^\^, 

M The mere delivering of other mens Modera- 
sermons is not necessarily criminal ; and be- 5°^,***" 
cause it is not, the mere circulating of a re- 
port thereof, though false and therefore sin- 
ful, is not necessarily slanderous. To render 
the delivery of another man's sermon crimi- 
nal, he who does this must be under some 
moral obligation not to deliver it. And in 
circulating a report of a mans delivering 
another man's sermon, it must be expressed, 
or it must be implied in the manner of circu- 
lating ; or it must be inferable from the of- 
fice or situation of the person concerning whom 
it is circulated, that the act alleged was im- 
proper, to give to the circulation of the re- 
port itself, the character of slander. 

" To say that a school boy had recited as 
an exercise memoriter a part of a sermon ; 
or that a layman had done this in a circle of 
friends to show the strength of his memory, 
though false, and therefore criminal, would 
not be slanderous. But to say falsely, that a 
minister had on the sabbath day, and in pub- 
lic, preached the sermon of another man, be- 
sides being false, would also be slanderous. 

" That it is slanderous falsely to circulate 
a report of a minister's preaching other men's 
sermons, we have already decided by the 
sanctioning of a process in which that act is 
charged as injurious ; nor can there beany 
doubt as to the soundness of that decision. 

" For were it declared allowable by our 
judicatures, for their members to preach at 
pleasure their own, or the sermons of other 
men ; and were the declaration published to 
our churches, tho' this would, thereafter, take 
away much of the moral turpitude which 



133 

*V"tK?" now attaches to the action, .still the decla- 
c v ^ v ^ ration, itself, would inflict a wound, both on 
Modera- literature and religion, deep, lasting, and dif- 

dre'ss'^' ficulttoneal - 

" To say nothing of the danger to which 
the doctrines of our church would be exposed, 
were her ministers allowed, instead of study- 
ing the word of God for themselves, to beg, 
or borrow, or, take their discourses ready 
made from the booksellers shelves, such a 
license would tend to discountenance indus- 
try ; to paralize exertion, and reduce, in the 
public estimation, so far as sermonizing was 
concerned, the ignorant and the learned, the 
diligent and the slothful, the foolish and the 
wise, to the same unenvied level. Then, 
grace apart, all the requisites for the due per- 
formance of the public duties of the ministe- 
rial office, would be memory and speech, 
together, with sufficient educntion to read and 
write. Because, by supposition, all that 
would be required of the licensed performer, 
would be, to assume the manner and repeat 
the language of other men. Though there 
were no guilt, there would be much de- 
gradation in such a state of things. 

" But this is not the light in which we are 
called to view this question. We have no 
such office as readers or recitors, nor any such 
legalized exercise in our churches, as recita- 
tions. We license and we ordain ministers, 
not to repeat the discourses of others, but to 
prepare and deliver discourses of tneir own. 
Hence our examinations to ascertain whether 
they are qualified for the performance of this 
high office; and hence our solemn charge to 
them to be diligent in study, as well as fervent 
in spirit. So intelligible and so well defined 
is the obligation imposed on the presbyterian 



minister to preach his own compositions, that Ml / J llck " 
whenever he preaches the compositions of .^^.^J, 
others, he can only absolve himself from the Modem- 
imputation of deception by an avowal at the t0I ' sAd " 
time, of the fact. For from the tenure of his* 
office, his auditors have a right to presume, 
unless he informs them to the contrary, that 
the discourses he delivers to them from the 
pulpit, are substantially his own productions, 
and not the productions of another. I say 
substantially : because by common consent, 
(and this constitutes the law on this article, 
without the transgression of which there is 
no deception,) it is allowed, not indeed, in 
printed, but in spoken discourses, to appro- 
priate an incidental thought, or transfer some 
peculiar expression, without interrupting the 
unity of the argument, by indicating the 
source from which it was drawn. It is 
allowed to take at pleasure, even larger por- 
tions, without express quotation from authors 
known to be in general use. It were quite 
superfluous to refer to Matthew or Isaiah, or 
to any other writer, either sacred or profane, 
so universally familiar as to be recognized 
without such reference ; and even where the 
writers are not familiar, if there be any thing 
in the matter or in the form of what is taken 
therefrom, that indicates its transfer, (as is 
often the case with history and poetry) it 
were unnecessary to indicate it. Nor is it 
ordinarily expected in the discussion of hack- 
neyed subjects, that the materials are original. 
But even on these subjects, and from whence- 
soever the materials are drawn, it is expected 
that the fabric into which they are wrought 
is, and of right it ought to be, unless the 
contrary is announced, the speaker's own. 
(r - Such is the implied obligation under 



tor's 
dress 



1&4 

M , 1 T Tuc i k " which every minister in our connection 
e ^L r ^. preaches. Express and voluntary obligations 
Modera- may indeed be superadded ; when the crime 
Ad- of plagiarism assumes a bolder type and the 
slander of having falsely imputed it a deeper 
malignity. Indeed the sanctions of official 
duty apart, it is understood that what a man 
publishes under his own name, or delivers in 
his own place (unless it be in the theatre, the 
recitation room, or in some other situation 
where the act explains itself) is, and there- 
fore of right ought to be his own. 

" Hence the disgrace every where attached 
to plagiarism. It sinks the character of an 
under graduate, and even of a school boy, to 
attempt to pass off as his own the produc- 
tions of his play fellow. The reason is obvious. 
It is the duty of every accountable being, to 
be candid and honest ; and an attempt to 
deceive, under whatever disguise it is made, 
always crosses our moral feelings. 

" But especially does this cross our moral 
feelings, when we meet with it in the teachers 
of religion, and during the service they per- 
fornv*at the altar of God. Here, if any 
where, we expect simplicity and sincerity ; 
actions as well as language that lie not. 

ff Almost every other virtue bends to cir- 
cumstances ; but truth, like justice, is un- 
alterable and eternal ; nor can there be a 
continued departure from either without weak- 
ening the moral principle, and giving a hue 
to the general character ; thus he who loses 
his regard for truth in one situation will not 
long feel its binding obligations in another ; 
and he who deceives on the sabbath day, will 
soon find himself betrayed into deception on 
other days. Indeed, so many disguises and 
equivocations are requisite, to give effect to 



135 

any one act of deception, that a man who M , r ' r J" c 1 k 
ventures on such a course, places his charac- .^~ ^'-> 
ter for veracity in jeopardy ; and the full ef- Modera- 
fect on community of upholding and sustain- J° r '* Ad " 
ing in office false and faithless teachers, even 
of religion itself, is not easily to be anticipat- 
ed. 

" Such a slander therefore as is charged in 
this prosecution, strikes at the honor of reli- 
gion, by striking at the honor of the teachers 
of it. And there are few more cruel or more 
effectual methods of traducing a minister of 
the gospel, than by falsely reporting against 
him, that he preaches not his own but other 
men's sermons. It tends directly to impeach 
his talents or his virtue ; to weaken his res- 
pectability and influence, and render him an 
object of pity or contempt; it does even more 
than this, it excites suspicion generally ; it 
*ends to embolden the profane, and to lessen 
mens reverence for religion itself, by lessen- 
ing their reverence for its accustomed teach- 
ers. Falsely to spread such a report, is there- 
fore slander, and to attempt to justify the 
spreading of it, is an aggravation of that slan- 
der. 

" If therefore, sir, you have said ought 
that is not true, or which the occasion did 
not require to have been said ; or ought which, 
though you believed it true, you have now 
reason to disbelieve, you will, I trust, ingenu- 
ously acknowledge it, and spare us the in- 
convenience and yourself the injury, of a for- 
mal trial." 

To which Mr. Tucker replied. 

» Sir, 

" I have nothing to acknowledge touch- 
ing my conduct in the points at issue before 
you, except that common imperfection inci- 



136 

M , r '~ r " c , k * dent to our nature, and which is attached to 

er's Trial. „ _ - ' 

v^,^^ all 1 say or do. 

Mr. Tuck- " Whether the clamor of persecution 
er's i plead- against another individual, and in which it 
has been said with so much assurance, that I 
was engaged ; whether this clamor has been 
artfully raised as a cover, to conceal from the 
public eye, the measures that were secretly 
taking to impeach my veracity and destroy 
my reputation, lest my testimony should on 
some future occasion appear against him, I 
will not undertake to determine. 

ki I am but a young man and have had 
but little experience in the affairs of this world. 
To me, however, the time, the manner, the 
nature of the prosecution commenced against 
me, and above all, the immense pains that 
have been taken to forestall public opinion, 
and bring the community in anticipation of 
my trial, to pronounce me guilty, are circums- 
stances which have, in my eye, a very sus- 
picious and ominous appearance. 

" Character is as dear to the young man, 
who as yet is friendless and unknown, as to 
him who has risen into notice, and is basking 
in the sunshine of popular favor ; at least, 
the youg man is entitled to an impartial trial, 
and ought not, in a christian community, to 
be condemned unheard. 

" If I have intentionally said ought that is 
false, or slanderous of Mr. Gumming, let me 
be condemned. I am sensible that a liar 
ought not to be commissioned to preach the 
gospel of truth ; or having been partially 
commissioned, that his step should be arrested 
before his foot has passed, and polluted by 
passing the threshold of the temple of 
God. 

" But ; if what I have said is true, and if 



I have said it only on fit occasions, I am yet ^ sl T" a c , k " 
to team th.it on that account, to be con- ^p^^/ 
demned ; for I am yet to learn th it it is a Mr. Tuck- 
crime in a bearer, when his miuister delivers, fspiead- 
otiaciallv, on the sabbath day from the pulpit, Ings ' 
after solemn pr ryer to God, a discourse which 
that he irer afterward reads in print at home ; 
I am yet to learn that it is a crime for that 
hearer to say, on all fit occasions, that he has 
read that sermon. Preaching other people's 
sermons is a public offence, and the public 
have a right to know it. 

" There has been more than one instance 
in Schenectady, of little children having read, 
in print what they had heard preached from 
the pulpit on the same Lord's day. There 
h as been more than one instance in Schenec- 
tady, in which, without any design, the same 
sermon preached on the sabbath day, has 
been read in the family and at the domestic 
altar, either immediately before, or immedi- 
ately after it was preached. And, though 
in one instance, the reading of a volume of 
sermons which had been commenced in a 
family, was suspended to prevent the chil- 
dren of the family from knowing that their 
minister continued to preach from it ; I did 
not understand that the parents, though they 
were professors of religion, told their children 
that it was criminal to say they had read 
what they had already read in that volume. 

" If a different morality prevails in an 
ecclesiastical court, a morality that allows 
the licentiate to be wantonly traduced, and 
falsely and maliciously accused with impuni- 
ty, but which stifles, in behalf of the ordained 
minister, even the voice of truth itself, so that 
facts which occured publicly and in the face 
of day, may not be prudently and privately 
18 



\6% 

3 V*T, llc . k " stated to those who ought to know them, lest 

C^v-W suc h a statement would lead to a disclosure 

Mr. Tuck- of fraud and shorten the career of falsehood 

er's plead- an d duplicity j if this be the morality that 

prevails in ecclesiastical courts, I have vet to 

learn that it is so. And though I should be 

condemned by the rules of such a morality, 

I should still feel that I was justified in the 

eye of God and by the conscience of man. 

" Without any further remarks, I specifi- 
cally plead : 

1. With respect to the first specification 
in this first charge, " the industrious circula- 
tion of (he report of Mr. Cumming's intoxica- 
tion at Mr. Marvin's," and with respect to 
his "drunkenness" as charged in the fourth 
allegation under the third charge. 

1. I deny, that I have industriously circu- 
lated either, or circulated either at all in the 
very terms and forms charged. 

2. Though I deny this, i admit, (for I des- 
pise equivocation, and will not atten-pt to 
shelter myself under a peculiar form of ex- 
pression,) / admit, that I have, on different 
occasions, been placed in such a situation, 
that I believed it to be my duty to speak in 
confidence to different persons, and to some 
of the witnesses named in this cause, freely, 
of the intemperance of the Rev. Hooper Cum- 
ming, both at the house of Uriah Marvin, in 
Albany, and also of his intemperance in Sche- 
nectady ; and my defence is, that I believed 
what I said was true; I still believe what I 
said was true, and I now claim the right of 
presenting before this court the whole evi- 
dence of its truth, and of all the circumstan- 
ces under which I have said it, as my justifi- 
cation for saying it. 

1. " With respect to the second allegation 



1S9 

in this first charge, to wit : " preaching other ^'^Sf 
people's sermons" I deny, that J have indus- -^0- v ^^' 
tnousiy circulated this report. Mr. Tuck- 

2. "Still, however, i admit, that I have con- ? r ^f plcad " 
versed freely, and with some of the witnesses 
named, relative to the report of Mr. Cum- 
ming's having preached other people's ser- 
mons, and that when interrogated, I have 
expressed my belief of the truth of that re- 
port; and that I have, in some instances com- 
municated something of my own knowledge 
of his having preached other men's sermons. 
But for all I have said, (and I might have 
said much more than I have) my defence is, 
that the report itself, in the fullest sense in 
which I have spoken of it, is true, and was, 
when I spoke of it, notorious 

" If this be not the case, if I have commu- 
nicated as report, or said of my own know- 
ledge, aught of the Rev. Hooper Cumming's 
preaching other people's sermons which is not 
true, and which I cannot prove to this judi- 
cature to be true, and proper under all cir- 
cumstance,^ have been said, let me be con- 
demned. 

If. " With respect to the second charge, 
the charge itself is a falsehood. Mr. Chester 
was my author of the report of Mr. Cum- 
ming's intemperance at Mr. Marvin's ; and 
though f now regret that I gave up my author 
to Mr. Gumming, I shall now prove that he 
was so. 

III. " With respect to the declaration* 
charged in this third charge, to wit : except 
the Marvin business, I never opened my lips 
against you ;" I deny, that I have made that 
declaration ; and if it is not proved that I 
did, the falsehood predicated falls of course. 

1st Specif. With respect to the first alle- 



140 

M ' r 'ty!?' 9 at * on °f slander under it, at Mr. Marvin's, 
y^v^/ it is false, and it will not appear in proof. 
Mr. Tuck- 2d. Specif With respect to the second alle- 
er>* plead- gafmn of slander charged, in conversation 
mss ' with the Rev. Dr. Coe, Dr. Burritt, Mr. 
Kellogg and counsellor Bliss, it is false, and 
its truth will not appear in proof. 

3d. Specif. With respect to the third alle- 
gation of slander ; though, as I have already 
admitted, I conversed freely with Mr. Crane 
and Mr. Lee, relative to Mr. Cumming's in- 
temperance, and his preaching other men's 
sermons, it was confidential ; the motive was 
good, and the occasion, as will appear, re- 
quired it. 

4th. Specif. " With respect to the fourth 
allegation, though (as 1 have already admit- 
ted) I have spoken freely at different times, 
with several of the persons named, relative 
to Mr. Cumming's intemperance and plagiar- 
ism, still my defence is, that all I have at 
any time said, was true was said to confi- 
dential friends, or was common fame at the 
time of saying it, and that the occasion jus- 
tified me in it. 

" I know not what testimony it is expected 
will appear against u e. I was not present 
with the committee during their examination 
of witnesses ; nor have they thought proper 
to communicate tome the information which 
they are in possession of, and which, if it h :d 
been consistent, I would have thought it kind 
in them to have communicated. The wit- 
nesses are taken from the family with whom 
I board, the friends at whose houses I have 
lodged, and my own inmates and companions 
at home ; not one of whom, I presume, will 
be found to have communicated a single fact 
concerning Mr. Cumming, as coming from 



141 

me ; nor can I anticipate the reason why thev Ml / 'J U( ** 

.. , ., r .. , J " er's Trial. 

are cited, unless it be on suspicion, because \^y^/ 
they are my intimate friends : and with the Mr. Tuck- 
ho;>e that during their examination, it would . er ' s P iead * 
appear that something- had been said by me 
concerning Mr.Cumming, in the silenceof re- 
tirement, and in the confidence of friendship, 
that n;ight have better not been said. Yet I 
wish every individual to come forward, and 
state to the extent of his knowledge, what has 
been said relative to this subject. 

" I am now ready for my trial ; and I have 
but one request to make, it is this : that the 
whole truth may come out. 

" I shall avail myself of no technical ad- 
vantages (which I might do, considering the 
manner in which some of the charges are 
brought against me) to narrow the field of 
enquiry ; and I request that the committee may 
not be permitted to avail themselves of any. 
I have suffered long enough in the eye of the 
public from false, or partially disguised state- 
ments, and I fondly hope, I have at length 
reached a tribunal, where not only the truth, 
but the whole truth may be spoken." 

Mr. Tucker having closed, the court pro- 
ceeded to take the testimony on the respec- 
tive charges in their order. 

FIRST CHARGE. 1st Charge, 

Common fame charges Mr. Mark Tucker 
with unchristian conduct, by an industrious 
circulation of reports against the Rev. Hoop- 
er dimming, to wit : Intoxication at Mr. 
Marvin's, and preachinq other people's ser- 

-T- ■ , n &££ 

Examination cf Dr. Coe, sworn on the part 
of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated, or circulated at all, 



14ft 

Mr. Tuck- tjj e fi rs t report charged in this first charge, 

cr's Trial. , . - r ive j . • i_- u •?• 

v^^^/ and in the unqualified terms in which it is 
1st charge charged, to wit : Intoxication at Mr. Mar- 
tin's ? 

Testimony. JfTfc I do not. 

Com. Has Mr. Tucker told you any thing 
relative to the report of Mr. Cumming's in- 
temperance at Mr. Marvin's ; if so, when, 
where and what ? 

Wit. I have no recollection that Mr. Tuck- 
er said any thing on the subject. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated the second report, 
charged in this first charge ? 

Wit. I do not ; I am under the impres- 
sion, however, that Mr. Tucker has told me, 
that he has heard Mr. Cumming preach in 
Schenectady, sermons that were not his own. 
Such impressions were made from conversa- 
tions in various quarters. 

Dr. Corning, Wm. Bliss, Esq. Mr. Hart, 

were respectively introduced and sworn, on 

the part of the prosecution, but knew nothing 

Mr.i.Hut- concerning either of the charges. 

monjr. eSl Mr. Isaac Hutton, sworn on the part of the 

prosecution. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated, or circulated at all, 
the first report charged in this first charge, 
and in the unqualified terms in which it is 
charged, to wit : Intoxication at Mr. Mar- 
vin's ? 

Wit No, sir. 

Com. Did Mr. Tucker ever tell you any 
thing relative to the report of Mr. Cumming's 
intemperance at Mr. Marvin's ; if so, when 
and what did he tell you ? 

Wit He has ; but he told me after it had 
been communicated by him to Mr. Cum- 



14& 

ming, in the presence of Dr. M'Auley, he Jfj.^ e J" 
told me that Mr. Chester told him. that Mr. ^^J^ 
dimming had been intemperate (or words to 1st Charge. 
that effect) at Mr. Marvin's. That it had 
been communicated to one of Mr. Cumming's JJj; 1 '^^ 1 ." 
elders, who had told Mr. Camming ; and mony. 
that Mr. Cum ming had called upon him in 
the presence of Dr. M'Auley. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated the second report, 
charged in this first charge, to wit : preach- 
ing other people's sermons ? 

Wit. I do not : I believe that Mr. Tucker 
has told me that Mr. Cumming has preached 
other peoples sermons. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Was it from Mr. Tucker you first 
heard the report of Mr. Cumming's intem- 
perance in Schenectady ? 

Wit. No, sir. 

Def How came Mr. Tucker to have the 
conversation he had with you ; was it sought 
on his part, or did you enquire of him con- 
cerning the reports in circulation, relative to 
Mr. Cumming ? 

Wit. Being impressed with the importance 
of hiving a suitable minister in this place, I 
considered it my duty to make all possible 
enquiry with regard to Mr. Cumming, who 
was then talked of ; I asked Mr. Tucker 
what was the course of Mr. Cumming's con- 
duct in Schenectady. He did tell me of the 
reports of his intemperance in Schenectady; 
but the particulars I cannot tell. He never 
told me any thing that I recollect but what I 
sought. 

Def Was not this conversation confiden- 
tial, and what Mr. Tucker said to you, was 
it not said to you as an elder of the church ? 



144 

irtTriah" Wit Jt WaS S0 - 

v^v^ Mr. Haliday. If it was confidential and 
1st Charge, treated so, how came you to be called before 
this court to give it in evidence ? 

Wit. My name was on the list of witnesses 
Rev. John f urms | 1 j j p resume by th e complainants. 

Chester's \ . r ' J r 

testimony. Jit x animation of Hev. John Chester, sworn 
on the p irt of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated, or circulated at all, 
the first report charged in this first charge, 
to wit : intoxication at Mr. Marvin's ? 

Wit. I do not. 

Com. Do you know that Mr.Tucker has in- 
dustriously circulated the second report charg- 
ed in the first charge, to wit : preaching other 
people's sermons ? 

Wit. I do not : nor do I know whether 
Mr. Tucker ever told me, that Mr. dimming 
had preached other people's sermons, or not. 
I have conversed freely with him ; and I may, 
or may not have heard him. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Do you know any thing of Mr. Cum- 
ming's preaching other people's sermons ; if 
so, what do you know ? 

Wit. I know that he did preach at Milton, 
before this judicature, a sermon taken from 
one which I heard the Rev. C. Channing 
2 r B ; B - preach at Dorchester, December, 1808. 

Wisner's r . . /»■*«• • « txt- 

testimony. btxaminatim of Mr. Benjamin B. Wisner, 
sworn on the part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated, or circulated at all, 
the first report charged in this first charge, 
and in the unqualified terms in which it is 
charged, to wit : intoxication at Mr. Marvin's ? 

Wit. I do not. 

Com. Did Mr. Tucker ever tell vou anv 



145 

thing relative to the report of Mr. Cumming's M , r 'o? uc . k " 

. . -, T»«- r . , ^ ers Trial. 

intoxication at Mr. Marvin s, previous tothe v^^^ 
interview between him and Mr. Tucker at jstcharge. 
Mr. Piatt's ; if so, what did he tell you ? Testimon 

Wit. I think he did not. 

Com, Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated the second report, 
charged in this first charge, to wit : preaching 
other people's sermons ? 

\Vtt 1 do not. Mr. Tucker informed me 
that Mr. Camming preached Mr. Barrow's 
sermon on this text, " not mtf will, but thine 
be done." Afterwards, I called at Mr. Tuck- 
ers room, and read in print, a sentence which 
1 had been informed by another person, was 
in Mr. (Jamming's sermon. 

Cro<s E ranunation. 

Def. Do you know any thing of the truth 
of Mr. Cum mine's preaching other people's 
sermons ; if so. what do you know? 

Wit. I have heard Mr. Gumming preach 
several sermons, which afterwards, I have 
read in print One from Luke ii. 34-5, of 
Dr. Griffin's, with the exceptions of a few 
sentences, and in some places of a few words, 
(applicable only to the occasion on which it 
was originally preached) verbatim. There 
was nothing added to the sermon that I re- 
collect. He began with the second para- 
graph and preached it to the bottom of the 
22d page, I think. I heard Mr. Cumming 
preach from the text, "It is appointed to all 
men once to die," fyc. which I afterwards read 
in a volume of Logan's sermons, verbatim, 
with these exceptions, which I recollect : 
Mr. Cumming put one of the sentences of 
jLogan into the mouth of J. Butler, lately 
jdeeeased, as addressing the students. I 
(heard Mr. Cumming preach from Dan. vi. 
19 



146 

Mi ;- t™*- 10, I think, a sermon which afterwards I 
■!^ An read in bishop Home's discourses, and found 
1st Charge, it to be the same, with a few verbal altera- 
. tions, which I do not recollect. I heard Mr. 

y ' dimming preach from this text, " what think 
ye of Chrtst" and read it immediately after 
I went home, in Robert Rol insen's discourses. 
Mr. dimming- b< gan nearly at the bottom of 
the fouth p i»-e of the sermon in the edition I 
read, and went on, verbatim, nearly to the 
close ; except that he had left out nearly one 
pajje, one or two sentences and some words : 
towards the close, he introduced that part of 
the sermon which, in the printed copy, fire- 
ceded the pi me where he commenced, with 
such alterations as made it more suitable for 
that pi ice rather thin the first part of the 
discourse. The text in Robinson, has this 
clause "whose son is A?," which Mr. dim- 
ming did not use. 1 heard Mr dimming 
preach from this text, "faith worketh by love." 
The evening of the same day I looked over a 
sermon of Robinson's, from the same text, and 
wis satisfied thatit was the same sermon that 
Mr. Gumming preached. I afterwards read 
the sermon throughout, and recognized a 
greater part to be verbatim. Mr. Gumming 
commenced near the top of the 2d page (in 
the edition I first looked at) of the sermon. 
I heard Mr. Gumming preach from this text, 
" And he was speechless." I afterwards read 
a sermon in Robinson from the same text, and 
recognized the greater part of it to be the 
same sermon that Mr. dimming preached. 
Dtf. Was it not a subject of notorious con 
vers-.tion in Schenectady, that Mr. Cumming 
preached other people's sermons ; and aftei 
preaching on the sabbath, was it not enquir 



14A 

ed bv many, in what author will these ser- M , r • ,T uc , k " 

• , .. • . , er s rr,al - 

DlOnS be 1 > : 1 1 n 1 ' ^^~ *m*. 

Wit. Yes, Sir. 1st Charge. 

/>'/.' Are you a member of the church iu Testimonv 
Schenectady \ 

Wit. YeS, >ir. 

Examination of Mr. Elam Clark, sworn 
ou the p irt of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has Mr. Eiam 
industriously circulated, or circulated at all, ^'^y les " 
the first report charged in this first ch irge ; 
and in the unqualified terms in which it is 
charged, to wit : intoxication at Mi'. Mar- 
vin's ! 

H it. I do not 

Com Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated the second report, 
charged in this first charge, to wit ; "preach- 
ing other people's sermons ?*' 

H it. I do not ; I do not recollect that he 
has said any thin •>• of his own knowledge to 
me on that subject. I believe I have heard 
Mr. Pucker, as 1 hive in my others, converse 
on that .subject. 

Cross Examination. 

Drf. Do you know any thing of the fact 
of Mr. Gumming 1 s intemperance; if so, what 
do you know ? 

Wit I h irdly know what to say ; I never 
saw Mr. Gumming intoxicated. I saw him 
make a very free use of ardent spirits ; but I 
don't know that I ever saw him act improp- 
erly under the influence of it. 

D f. Was it not a subject of notorious 
conversation in Schenecta ly, that Mr. Cum- 
mina: preached other people's sermons ? 

Wit. Yes, sir. 

D f. Do you know any thing of the truth 



Testimony. 



14$ 

JVI , r T r . Ui j k - of Mr. Cumming's preaching borrowed ser- 
X^J^/ mons ; if so, what do you know 1 
1st Charge. WiL I know nothing, unless, a part of ano- 
ther's sermon appearing in the one Mr. Cum- 
ming lately published. 

Def. Did yon, or did you not, borrow of 
Dr. Nott, a MS. sermon, on " the value of 
the soul," and lend the same to the Rev. H. 
Cumming at his request; and if so, when 
was it ? 

Wit. I borrowed such a sermon of Dr. Nott, 
(at Mr. Cumming's request) and lent it to 
Mr. dimming ; the time I can't exactly tell. 
It was while Mr. Cumming was preaching in 
Schenectady on probation, I think in Au- 
gust, 1815. 

Def. Have you since compared a printed 
sermon of Mr. Cumming's with that MS. of 
Dr. Notts ; and if so, did you discover any 
evidence that any part or parts of the printed 
sermon were taken from the MS '? 

Wit. I have compared the printed sermon 
with the MS. and find a very close resem- 
blance in some parts. 

Def. Had Mr. Cumming that MS. long 
enough to copy it ? 

Wit. He had it in his possession three or 
four days. 

Def Have you in your possession any ex- 
tracts taken from Dr. Notts MS. which 
agree in whole or in part, with Mr. Cum- 
ming's sermon ; if so, will you produce and 
read them ? 

Wit. I have, sir, I will read them. 

Def Have you examined the passages 
quoted in Young, by Dr. Nott ; if so, do you 
find them varied from the printed text 1 

Wit. 1 have examined them, and do find 
them varied. 



14S 

Def. Has Mr. Cummiug's sermon that pas- M , r ' J uc }' 
sage of poetry as it stands in the printed text; \^ / ^ 
or, as it stands in Dr. Notts MS. 1st charge. 

Hit. As it stands in Dr. Notts MS. with „ § . 

i i^ -» r» i -testimony. 

the exception ot 2 or 6 words. 

Dr. Sott. Did you inform Dr. Nott for 
whom, or for what purpose you borrowed the 
MS on the value of the soul, at either of the 
times in which you borrowed it ? 

Wit. In the last instance I know I did not. 
In the first instance I borrowed it solely to 
read. 

Examination of Mr. Cnshman, sworn on 
part of the prosecution. 

Witness knew nothing. 

Mr. Cumming requested permission to 
read his statement of grievances again, which 
had been committed to him for alterations and 
amendments ; presbytery granted this privi- 
lege, and Mr. Cumming proceeded to read 
the same. 

After which Mr. Cumming observed, that 
if he had been correctly informed, as to the 
course of measures pursued by the presbytery, 
in relation to Mr. Tucker's trial, he intends 
the same general observations as contained 
in articles 1st, 2d, 3d, 5th, 7th, 9th, and 10th, 
excepting only, the last remark, under art. 
1st, as a protest to that course of procedure. 
The presbytery will, then, at once, observe 
that by substituting the name of Mr. Tucker, 
in the room of Mr. Chester, these observations, 
as above particularized, will apply with equal 
emphasis to both cases. 
Hooper Cumming. 

Mr. dimming was called for as a witness. 
The defendant made no objections to his ad- 
mission ; but he did not appear. 

Mr. Kellogg, Dr. Eldridge, were sworn on 



150 

m , • 1 ' l,ck ; the part of the prosecution, but knew noth- 

ers's I rial. . * r 

1st Charge. Examination of Mr. Johnson, sworn on the 
part of the prosecution. 
>0Dy " Wit. Knew nothing more than he had tes- 
tified in the former trial. 
Mr. J. Examination of Mr. Crane, sworn on the 

Crane's p art f the prosecution. 

Com Do >ou know that Mr Tucker has 
industriously circulated, or that he has circu- 
lated at all, the first report charged in this 
first charge ; and in the unqualified terms in 
which it is charged, to wit : intoxication at 
Mr. Marvin's ? 

Wit. Not exactly in the words stated. 

Com. Has he told you any thing relative 
to the report of Mr. Cumming's intemper- 
ance at Mr. Marvin's ; if so, when and what? 

Wit. The* time I don't recollect particular- 
ly ; to the best of my knowledge, he told me 
that Mr. Chester told him, that Mr. Marvin 
told Mr. Chester that Mr. Cumming was so 
far intoxicated or disguised (which term I 
do not recollect) with liquor, as Mr. Marvin 
supposed, that he did not wish him to go out 
of his house. 1 can't state particularly the 
expression that Mr. Tucker used ; my im- 
pression is, there was something said of his 
holding him, or trying to prevent him from 
going out of the house. I am not certain 
that this impression was from Mr. Tuck- 
er : 1 received it about that time. 

Com. Do you know that he has told to 
others, what he has told to you, relative to 
the report of Mr Cumming's intemperance at 
Mr. Mfarvin's ; if so, to how many, and to 
whom ? 

Wit. A little time after that, he mentioned 
the substance of this conversation to Mr. Lee, 



151 

in my presence, and to no other, to ray ^ r s '.S?" 
knowledge. ^rs./V 

Com. Do yon know any thing of Mr. Tuck- 1st Charge. 
er*9 having industriously circulated the second T . 
report, charged in the first charge, to wit : 
preaching other people's sermons I 
Wit. I do not. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Do yon know any thing of the fact of 
Mr. dimming* intemperance j if so, whatdo 
yon know ? 

Wit. I once saw Mr. dimming at Mr. 
Lee's, when it appeared to me, he acted dif- 
ferently from what he would have done if he 
had not made too free use of strong drink. At 
another time I came down, with Mr dim- 
ming, to Alb »ny. He preached in the first 
presbyterian church in the evening. We re- 
turned the next day, together, to Shenecta- 
dy. Returning, we called at Mr DeForest's 
tavern ; shortly after we entered the house, 
Mr. dimming told the landlord, you know 
my drink, or words to that ett'ect. The 1 ;nd- 
lord answered. I do, and went to the bar and 
prepared something of the colour of brandy, 
about a gill, as I supposed (but do not know 
bat part of the quantity was water) which 
contained sugar, as I thought. Mr. Cum- 
ming asked me to drink with him, I refused. 
Mr. dimming drank the contents. Shortly- 
after Mr. dimming called for a pint of beer, 
and again asked me to drink with him, I re- 
fused As he was about to drink the last of it. 
I told him, it was too much for a temperate 
man to drink ; he appealed to the landlord in 
these words, if my memory serves me, " I 
have often called at your house, did you ever 
know me to drink too much." The landlord 
replied, he had not. Mr. Cumming said, 



Testimony. 



152 

M » r " tTY " ^ ere * s one °^ n, y e ^ ers accusing me of 
k^^^ drinking too much, or intemperance (I don't 
1st Charge, recollect which) and I thought I would ap- 
peal to you." A little after we left the house, 
Mr. Cumming complained of my reproving 
him before the landlord ; I acknowledged I 
thought I had better not spoken what I did 
before him. He said he took no offence, pre- 
suming that I did not do it to wound his feel- 
ings. Mr. Cummingbegan to be very trifling 
in his conversation ; urged me to let him 
drive ; as I refused, he told me I might hold 
the whip, if I would let him drive the horse ; 
he afterwards promised if F would give him 
the whip, he would not strike thehorse ablow 
without my consent ; but struck the horse 2 
or 3 times immediately. I took the reins a- 
gain. I said something to him about moving 
from Schenectady ; he told me if I went 
away he should ; I think the reply I made was, 
1 Mr. Cumming, let the world flatter, but 
christians ought not to be guilty of it." To 
which he replied, I do not flatter, I speak the 
truth in God ; if you go away, I will not stay 
a week. A little before we got to Schenecta- 
dy, he was very urgent to drive by a waggon 
which was before us ; upon my refusing, he 
seized the reins and endeavored to start the 
horse, and did, so that it was with difficulty 
I prevented the horse from going by the wag- 
gon before us ; he said as I would not drive 
by when he wished me to, I think he told me, 
I should drive no faster than he should per- 
mit ; I think he took hold of the reins and en- 
deavored to stop the horse in the street, this 
was after we entered the town. 

Def. Had you communicated to Mr. Tuck- 
er, any thing relative to Mr. Cumming's in- 
temperance elsewhere, before he informed 



isa 

yeu of the report of his intemperance at Mr. gJ, r 8 ' T ^" a c , k " 
Marvin's ; it' so, what had you communicat- \^y^> 

ed ? 1st Charge. 

Wit. I am not positive that I had ; but Testimony , 
my impression is, that I had communicated 
information received from Mr. Lee, particu- 
larly. 

Def. Did you understand at the time, that 
what Mr. Tucker told you relative to Mr. 
Cumming's intemperance, was told you as 
an elder of his church, to make a prudent and 
private use of for his good, or, with liberty to 
communicate it generally, and with a design 
that it should be so communicated ? 

Wit. I think Mr. Tucker told me, at the 
time, that he did not wish to have it go to 
any body but Mr. dimming ; I think Mr. 
Tucker added, that it was mentioned to me 
as an elder of Mr. Cumming's church. 

Def. Have you ever communicated the re- 
port as coming from Mr. Tucker ? 

Wit. I did to Dr. Nott and Mr. Kelly, 
members of the committee ; I do not recol- 
lect that I had previously. 

Def. Had there not been a conversation 
relating to duty on the subject of Mr. Cum- 
ming's intemperance, and were there not 
persons selected to converse with Mr. Cum- 
ming before the thing became public ? 

Wit. Yes, sir. 

Def Did not Mr. Tucker consent that Mr. 
dimming might be conversed with, on the 
subject of his intemperance, at Mr. Marvin's, 
provided Mr. Tucker's name was not men- 
tioned ? 

Wit. He did consent. 

Def. Do you know any thing of the truth 
of Mr. Cumming's preaching other people's 
sermons ; if so, what do you know ? 
20 



Testimony. 



154 

a J r *T Tu i k " ^*** ' ^° ' t ' lere was tt P r ' nte d sermon of 
v^v^*, Dr. Griffin's, the substance of which I have 
1st charge, heard Mr. dimming- preach twice ; it was 
a dedication sermon, as much of it as re- 
lated to the dedication of the meeting-house, 
wis left out ; and I think one or two senten- 
ces in the introduction, were left out. I have 
seen another printed sermon of Mr. Robson 
or Robinson, I think ; the text, " What think 
ye rf Christ, white son is he V Mr. Cu na- 
ming; used only the first clause ; the substance 
of which sermon, I think I heard Mr. dim- 
ming preach twice, there were some senten- 
ces, I believe, left out. I have seen two ser- 
mons of bishop Home, the principal part of 
which I have heard Mr. Gumming preach ; I 
saw a sermon list fall, which, when read to 
me, I recognized the principal part of it, as 
one Mr. dimming had preached ; the author's 
name was Barrow. 
Petition A petition for the immediate installment of 

f u 0m u h r rtl Mr. Cummins:, over the 3d presbvterian con- 
church for . . p? r . 

jvir. Cum- gregation in Albany, was handed to the mod- 
Staiiltion! erator > b y Mr - Wells, in the name, and at 
the request of Messrs. Lucas and Graham, 
the 3d commissioner being out of town. 

The petition was read and referred to the 
moderator and Dr. Coe. 
„ „ „ Examination of Mr. Samuel Lee, sworn on 

Mr. Sam'l. , *u *• 

Lee's tes- the part of the prosecution. 

timoDy. Com. Has Mr. Tucker told you any thing- 

relative to a report of Mr. Cumming's intem- 
perance at Mr. Marvin's ; if so, when and 
what? 

Wit. It is my impression that he did, tho' 
I did not at first recollect it. In the course of 
conversation Mr. Tucker said, he had receiv- 
ed information that Mr. Cumming was, 
(whether he said intoxicated, or disguised with 



155 

liquor, I do not know, he did not sav drunk) M /- T u< $* 
the impression! got was that Mr. dimming .^^^.. 
was what we generally understand by being utcharg*. 
the worse for liquor, so much so, that Mr. . 
Marvin thought it not prudent to let him go 
out. I think he further stated, that Mr. Mar- 
vin w is under the necessity of keeping liquor 
out of his way. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
told to others what he has told to you, relative 
to the report of Mr. Cumming's intemperance 
at Mr. Marvin's ; if so, to how many, and to 
whom ? 

U it. I have no recollection of his having 
mentioned it any but to Mr. Crane and myself. 

( om. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated the second report 
charged in this first charge, to wit : preach- 
ing other people's sermons ? 

Wit. I do not know that he has ; I heard 
him mention the report ; he was not my first 
informant however. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Was it from Mr. Tucker you first 
heard the report of Mr. Cumming's intemper- 
ance at Mr. Marvin's 1 

Wit. It is my impression that I had heard it 
before, I cant be positive. 

Def. Do you know any thing of the fact of 
Mr. Cumming's intemperance ; if so, what do 
you know ? 

Wit. At one time, I think in June or July 
last, Mr Cuimmingand myself went out in a 
boat across the river ; he gave me a quart 
bottle of wine, which he wished to have me 
keep concealed while we went through the 
streets. During the time we were gone, per- 
haps two hours, or more, the bottle of wine was 
drank ; I drank but very little of it myself. 



156 

er's tyS?" ^ nen we returned, I observed Mr. Cum- 
\,^^^ mine's conduct was very different from what it 
1st Charge, was when we went over the river ; being dis- 
Testim P ose d to black-guard persons on the shore. 
' It was with difficulty I restrained him from 
using improper expressions to a respectable 
citizen. Mr. James Boyd was walking on 
the shore ; he asked me if he should hallow 
out " Jimme Bryd the Boxer" I told him 
" by no means ;" he did speak once or twice, 
calling him by that name; but on my remons- 
trating, he desisted. 

On another occasion, Mr. dimming, my- 
self, and another person, were amusing our- 
selves in pitching quoits ; Mr. dimming was 
very civil the fore part of the day. Mr. Cum- 
in in g admitted that a quart of brandy was 
sent for that day, which was nearly drank 
up, perhaps half a gill or more left; I did not 
drink any myself, neither did I see Mr. Cum- 
ming drink but once or twice. He several 
times asked me to go in and drink some bran- 
dy, I did not go in myself, but he did. In 
the afternoon his conduct was different ; 
while pitching quoits he would endeavor to 
cheat, frequently making use of obscene lan- 
guage, hallowing, threatening, telling false- 
hoods ; all which induced me to believe it 
was the effect of drinking too freely. At ano- 
ther time I returned home from a prayer 
meeting, when I opened the door I observed 
a decanter with brandy, and a pitcher of wa- 
ter on the table. Mr. Cumming's conduct, 
after I came into the room, was uncommonly 
rude. After I sat down he pulled me over 
backward a number of times ; dared me sev- 
eral times to scuffle with him. I told him I 
had been to a meeting and did not feel dis- 
posed ; neither did I think it proper to carry 



15<\ 

on at this rate. I accordingly left the room. M , T -J^' 

_ . ~ J , . er's I rial. 

He afterwards came into my room, and ask- v^ / ^ 
ed me what I was mad at. I told him I was i sl charge. 
not mad ; but that my feelings were wound- _ t . 

11 f i liii • Testimony. 

ed, and that 1 thought he behaved in a man- 
ner unbecoming a minister of the gospel. 
During the time that we were in the room, 
he was very noisy, and made use of obscene 
expressions. 

At another time Mr. Gumming and myself 
only were pitching quoits. He was very ci- 
vil Ijefbre dinner ; at dinner he drank freely 
of spirits. After dinner we went out again ; 
his conduct was very different ; knocking off 
my hat ; striking me ; cheating in play ; 
falsehood, and telling me I was drunk. I 
told him he had drank too much ; he said I 
was a liar. The reason why I told him so 
was, I thought he did not walk strait. In 
consequence of his behavior, I continued out 
with him for some time, not wishing him to 
go in while in that situation. 

Def. Had you communicated to Mr. 
Tucker any thing relative to Mr. Cumming's 
intemperance elsewhere, before he informed 
you of the report of his intemperance at Mr. 
Marvin's ; if so, what had you communicat- 
ed to him ? 

Wit. I can't recollect particularly. The 
conversation was on the subject of intemper- 
ance generally. FindingMr. Tucker in pos- 
session of some of the facts, relative to Mr. 
Cumming's intemperance at my house, Icon- 
versed freely with him ; I informed Mr. Tuck- 
er of several occurrences : 1st. Of spiritous 
liquor being brought into the house, I thought 
too frequently, at the request of Mr. Gum- 
ming ; likewise this expression I recollect, 
from a pint to a quart per day, not meaning 



158 

M , 1 - T uc , k " every day ; and likewise mentioned to him 

er's Trial. •> J , . 

'^#- v ^ifar respecting an occurrence that took place on 
1st Charge. Monday evening after the last communion in 
_ ,. Schenectady ; that Mr. Cummin^ had taken 

testimony. . i 1 • 1 • i i ■ • 

my horse and sleigh without my knowledge ; 
that I returned home between 9 and 10 in 
the evening, and found the sleigh broken ; 
that from the information received from my 
family and from Dr. Toll, I had reason to be- 
lieve Mr. Gumming was intoxicated. 

Def. Did you understand at the time, that 
what Mr. Tucker told you, relative to Mr. 
Cumming's intemperance, was told you as 
an elder of his church, to make a prudent 
and private use of for his good, or thit it was 
told you with liberty to communicate it 2"< j n- 
erally, and with a design that it should be 
so communicated ? 

Wit. I took it to be confidential ; I conceiv- 
ed he told it to us with liberty to tell Mr. 
Gumming. 

Def. Had you communicated the report, as 
coming from Mr. Tucker, to any person, ex- 
cept Mr. Gumming, before the commence- 
ment of this prosecution ? 

Wit I do not recollect as I did. 

IJff. Was it from Mr. Tucker you first 
heard the report of Mr. Cumming's preach- 
ing other people's sermons ? 

Wit It mas not. 

Def. Do you know any thing of the truth 
of Mr. Cumming's preaching other people's 
sermons ; if so, what do you know ? 

Wit. I heard him preach three sermons, 
which I afterwards read in print ; one of Dr. 
Griffin's, taken from Luke ; some part of it 
was left out ; it was a dedication sermon, and 
that which was applicable to the dedication 



159 

he left out ; two from bishop Home, with 1 *J'J? l f m 
some trifling alterations. v^yW 

Dr. Blatchford. Did not Mr. dimming fre- i st charge. 
quentlv have company, and might not the li- _ . 

* , jl'i i /»• Testimony 

quor he procured, nave been made use of in 
hospitality ? 

Wit. That may sometimes have been the 
case. 

Other questions were put to witness, but the 
answers containing; nothing relevant, were not 

so » 

recorded. 

Examination of Mr. Crosby, sworn on the JJ" f r( !-" 

J J"> by's testi- 

part ot the prosecution. mony. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated, or circulated at all, 
the first report charged in this first charge, to 
wit : intoxication at Mr. Marvin's ? 

Wit. No, sir. 

Com. Did Mr. Tucker ever tell you any- 
thing relative to the report of Mr. Cumming's 
intoxication, at Mr. M irvin's, previous to its 
being made public by the interview between 
him and Mr Tucker." at Mr. PI itts ! 

II it. He never told me any thing previous 
to that interview. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circul ted the second report, 
charged in this first charge, to wit : preach- 
ing other people's sermons ? 

H it. I do not. In common conversation 
with Mr. Tucker, I have heard him say, that 
Mr. dimming preached other men's sermons ; 
I do not recollect that I ever heard Mr. Tuck- 
er give it as his opinion, that Mr. Cumming 
preached more than one sermon of other 
men's, and that was Barrow's 
Cross Examination. 

Def. Do you know any thing of the truth 
of Mr. Cumming's preaching other's sermons? 



M ' r ' iS Wlt ' I beard Mr. dimming preach a ser- 
?^ y ^ raon last Oct. I believe, which, afterwards I 
1st Charge, saw in bishop Home ; which, except the in- 
„, . troduction, I believe, was nearly verbatim i 

Testimony. , ' . D \ J 

the text was in Kev. 1. 7. 

D(f. Did not Mr. Tucker tell Mr. Cum- 
ming-, at the 2d interview with Dr. M'Auley, 
that he could not pretend to state in terms, 
what Mr. Chester said to him, but as to the 
meaning he could not be mistaken ? 

Wit. Mr. Tucker said to Mr. Cumming, 

that he had stated the report as he received it 

from Mr. Chester ; and observed, that he 

could not be mistaken. 

Mr. Wm. Examination of Mr. Adams, sworn on the 

Adams's part of the prosecution. 

Qony ' Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated, or circulated at all, 
the first report charged in this first charge, 
and in the unqualified terms in which it is 
charged ? 

Wit. I do not, sir ; I never heard of Mr. 
Cumming's intoxication at Mr. Marvin's, un- 
til after Messrs. Cumming and Tucker had 
their interview. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated the second report 
charged in this first charge, to wit : preach-, 
ing other people's sermons ? 

Wit. I don't know that he has circulated 
such a report at all ; Mr. Tucker and I were 
intimate, and usually attended Mr. Cum- 
ming's church ; when either of us read a 
sermon in print, that Mr. Cumming had 
preached, we naturally spoke of it to each 
other. This conversation, however, was al- 
ways considered by me, in confidence ; not al- 
ways with myself alone, but with a small 
class of friends, who were students in divinity. 



161 

Cross Evamination. 1 fflP* 

IJej. Do you know any thing; ot the truth S- ^ N/ ^^/ 
of Mr. Cummins: s preaching other people's i s t Charge, 
sermons ; if so, what do you know ? _, . 

Ti i rii im«-^i Testimony. 

Wit. 1 know that 1 have heard Mr. dim- 
ming preach sermons, which I afterwards read 
in print. There are only three sermons which 
I should be willing to testify to ; one of Dr. 
Griffin's, which he preached at the eastward. 
The other two were delivered in thepresb\te- 
rian church in Schenectady, two weeks af- 
ter the report of their having been preach- 
ed in Alb my, were in a vol. of Toplady's 
works, from this text, " Seen of angels." Mr. 
dimming took these words, in connection, 
with the other part of the verse, beginning, 
(i Great is the mystery of godliness ," &c. 
There was a difference in Mr. Cumming's 
sermons, from the text " seen of angels ;" Mr. 
Gumming introduced the subject of baptism, 
and made some observations upon it, which 
is not found in Toplady, except that Mr. 
Cu mining's sermons were substantially the 
same. With regard to the sermon of Dr. 
Griffin, which I heard Mr. Cumming preach, 
it was from this text, " And he said unto Ma- 
ry his mother, Behold this child," &c. That 
sermon Mr. Cumming did not deliver pre- 
cisely as it was in print ; a few of the first 
sentences in the introduction, were omitted ; 
a discussion at the close on the subject of the 
millenium, was also omitted ; excepting that 
there was no essential difference. 

Def. What did Mr. Cumming tell you, con- 
cerning the sermon of Dr. Griffin, which you 
heard him preach ? 

Wit. He spoke of that sermon from the 
above text, either in comparison with the one 
%i 



163 

m £t5?" ^ e preached in Ballston, at Mr. Smith's ordi- 
!^^ ^^j nation, or of that he preached in Milton, and 
1st charge, said that this sermon did not cost him half so 
. . much labour as either of them ; or that the 

,ony * one with which he compared it, did not cost 
him half as much labour as this. 

Def. Were not all these persons, mention- 
ed as a circle of friends, considered as pos- 
sessing the same knowledge, and as confi- 
dential in their communications to one anoth- 
er, relative to the subject of Mr. Cu mining's 
preaching other people's sermons ? 
Wit. They were. 

Mr. Bassett was sworn on the part of the 
prosecution, but knew nothing. 

Examination of Mr. U. Marvin, sworn on 
the part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
circulated at all, the first report, charged in 
this first charge, viz. intoxication at Mr. Mar- 
vin's ? 

Wit. I never heard him speak Mr. Cum- 
Mr. ming's name at my house. 
strong's Examination of Mr. Stronq, sworn on the 
part of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
the 1st specification in this first charge ? 

Wit. I know nothing about it, but from Mr. 
Cumming. 

Com. Do you know any thing concerning 
the 2d specification in this first charge 1 
Wit I do not. 

Cross Examination. 
Def. Who first told you of the report, that 
Mr. Tucker had slandered Mr. Cumming ? 

Wit. I cannot tell ; I don't recollect any 
particular person, but Mr. Cumming. I have 
heard it from other persons, but I don't re- 
collect who. at present. 



testimony. 



163 

Def. Did not Mr. Camming tell you what fj- .*Jj*; 
passed at the interview between him andMr. y^y^ 
Tucker, at Mr. Piatt's, in Shenectady ; if so, i s t Charge. 
what did he tell you '? „ t . 

** t~* • ■ a i • lcstimony. 

Wit. Mr. Camming told, in my hearing, 
that after he heard the report about intemper- 
ance, he came to Albany, first to Mr. Mar- 
vin, then to Mr. Chester ; Mr. Marvin de- 
nied that he told Mr. Chester ; Mr. Chester 
denied that he told Mr. Tucker ; and that the 
matter rested with Mr. Tucker. 

Examination of Chancellor Kent, sworn on £^ D , ce,l °' 
the part of the prosecution. Umooy. 

Wit. Knew nothing on this first charge. 
Cross Examination. 

Def. Did you ever hear Mr. Cu mining 
preach a sermon in the presbyterian church, in 
Albany, which you afterward read in print ; 
if so, in what author did you read it ? 

Wit. I heard him preach a sermon in Alba- 
ny, which I afterwards read in Toplady. I 
heard him preach it and looked at it the next 
week ; I called at Mr. Backus' book-store, 
where, I was informed, the vol. might be had, 
and took the sermon home with me to my 
office, and read it attentively. The sermon 
was the same ; it was an exact copy, verba- 
tim, without any alteration or diminution. 

Def. Did you compare the MS. of the ser- 
mon you heard Mr. Cumming preach, with 
the printed copy ; if so, was it a true copy ? 

Wit. I never saw the MS. 

Miss L. Peck was sworn on the part of the 
prosecution, but new nothing. 
Cross Examination. 

Def. Do you know any thing concerning 
the intemperance of the Rev. H. Cumming ; 
if so, what do you know ?* 

* See note next page. 



164? 

Mr. Tuck- Mr. Wells in the name of the commissioners. 

ers's Inal. ' 

v^v^z requested th t presbytery would immediately 
1st charge, enter upon the request made yesterday, \iz. 
Testimony. *^ e ' mmec liate installation of Mr. dimming. 
The moderator decided, that it would be in 
order, and that he thought it would be the du- 
ty of presbytery to do so, the first moment there 
was an opening for their taking up the busi- 
ness. 

Miss H. Peck was sworn on the part of the 
prosecution, but knew nothing. 
Cross Examination. 
Def. Do you know any thing concerningthe 
intemperance of the Rev. H. Cumming ; if 
so, what do you know ?* 

31rs. Marvin was sworn on the part of the 
prosecution, but knew nothing. 
Dr. M'Au- Thomas M'Auley, LL. D. sworn on the 
Sny. teSti * P art of the prosecution. 

Com. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated, or circulated at all, 
the first report charged in this first charge, 
and in the unqualified terms in which it is 

* When this question was offered, the moderator said, 
that he was aware that the. defendant had a right to in- 
sist on its being put and answered ; it would, however, 
be recollected, that the witness had been examined on 
that point, during Mr. Chester's trial, and the testimo- 
ny then given, was on record. It would be painful to 
hear a repetition of it ; and if it was not necessary, con- 
sidering Mr. C's alleged state of mind, he thought it 
ought not to be now repeated. He was sensible, that 
the defendant had a right to make his defence complete ; 
and it was not his wish, that the court should interfere 
with the exercise of that right, so far as such exercise 
was necessary. If, therefore, Mr. Tucker would waive 
the right of examining the witness, on the point in 
question, he should hereafter be allowed, if deemed ne- 
cessary, to read to the court, the testimony on that point, 
which the witness had already given. 

Mr. Tucker said, that on the ground stated by the 
moderator, he waived the right of examining the witness 



165 

charged, to wit: intoxication at Mr. 3far- M }' J ac }' 

. , © ' er's Trial. 

If if. I have no knowledge of it in those ist charge. 

terms. _ Testimon 

Com. Have you heard Mr. Tucker say any 
thing relative to the report of Mr Cumming's 
intemperance at Mr. Marvin's; if so, when 
and what ? 

If it. At Mr. Cu mining's request, I called 
with him to see Mr. Tucker. Mr. dim- 
ming interrogated Mr. Tucker in relation to 
that charge. 

Com. What was the amount of what Mr. 
Gumming said to Mr. Tucker, or of what 
Mr. Tucker said to Mr. dimming, at their 
first interview ? 

It it. Mr. Gumming told Mr. Tucker, that 
he understood he had been slandering his 
character. Mr. Tucker said he did not know 
that he tad. Mr. dimming told him that he 
had told Mr Lee, that he had been drunk at 
Mr. Marvin's. Mr. Tucker replied, that he 
did not know that he had particularly told 
Mr. Lee ; he had told Mr. Crane, and Mr. 
Lee was present ; but he had not put it in 
those terms ; but w hat he said was, that he 
was disguised, or the worse for liquor ; or the 
idea was, that he was not in a state to go out. 
Mr. dimming insisted that Mr. Tucker had 
told it in the unqualified terms, that he was 
drunk. Mr. Tucker said he had not, but he 
would not quibble about words. Mr. Cum- 
ming asked him, what was his object in tell- 
ing this to Mr. Crane? Mr. Tucker told him, 
he thought it was a report of that nature that 
Mr. Cumming ought to be acquainted with 
it ; and he knew that Mr. Crane was in hab- 
its of intimacy with him, and supposed he 
would tell him of it. Mr. Cumming asked 



166 

Mr. Tuck-hiQ^ why he did not come and tell it to him, 
' himself? Mr. Tucker told him, he thought it 



1st Charge, would come better from an older person, 

he was but a young man, and not on very 
aony# intimate terms with him. Mr. Cumming, af- 
ter some further observations, asked Mr. 
Tucker for his author. Mr. Tucker seemed 
to hesitate about giving his author ; he said 
he did not know that he was authorized to 
tell it. Mr. Cumming said, that if Mr. 
Tucker did not tell him, he must consider 
him as the author of the lie, for he had talk- 
ed with Mr. Marvin the day before in Alba- 
ny, and Mr. Marvin declared he never even 
suspected him of such a thing. After some 
conversation Mr. Tucker gave Mr. Chester as 
his informant ; the first interview was at Mr. 
Tucker's room, no one present but myself 
and the two gentlemen ; there was one there 
before the conversation began, and one came 
in after the conversation ended, but no one 
was there during the interview. I believe it 
was on the 2d January. 

Com. \\ hat was the amount of what Mr. 
Cumming said to Mr. Tucker ; and what 
was the amount of what Mr. Tucker said to 
Mr. Cumming, at their second interview? 

Wit. Mr. Cumming requested me the se- 
cond time to go with him to Mr. Tucker's 
room, on his return from Albany. When we 
went in we found Mr. Crosby sitting with 
Mr. Tucker. Mr. Cumming told Mr. Tuck- 
er, that he had been to Albany the day before ; 
that he had gone to Mr. Hutton's and sent 
for Mr Marvin ; that he asked Mr. Marvin, 
in the presence of Mr. Hutton, in relation to 
this report of intemperance. Mr. Marvin told 
him that he had never told any body of it ; 
that he did not believe it : that he had not 



16*1 

any reason to believe it ; that he ought rath- gJ, r sT ^ k " 
er to have apologized to him for not putting \^v^ 
more liquor on his table, than to have said 1st charge, 
any thing to him for having drank too much ; - ,. 
that he had then sent tor Mr. Chester, and 
asked him whether he had ever told Mr. 
Tucker, that he had been dmnk at Mr. Mar- 
vin's. Mr. Chester declared that he never 
had ; that Mr. Marvin had never told him so, 
and that he did not believe it. 

And Mr. Cumming told Mr. Tucker, that 
now the lie lay at his own door, and that he 
might do as he pleased about it. He further 
stated, that as he did not believe it proceeded 
from any malice in Mr. Tucker, but tor want 
of prudence, common to youth, he would 
take no further notice of it ; and seemed to 
advise Mr. Tucker not to take any more no- 
tice of it. Mr. Tucker told him it was true, 
notwithstanding ; that he had falsified noth- 
ing about it. 

Corn. Do you know that Mr. Tucker has 
industriously circulated the second report, 
charged in this first charge ? 

Wit. No, sir ; I have no knowledge of it 
at all. He never said any thing to me on 
that subject. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Do you know any thing of the truth 
of Mr. Cumming's preaching other people's 
sermons ; if so, what do you know ? 

Wit. I do know that he has preached ser- 
mons, that I have afterwards read in the 
same words in print ; I have read several in 
Logan ; several in Home, and several in Rob- 
inson. I heard him from Robinson, on the 
subject of " faith and holiness," on, that the 
bible is a good book ; on that subject, " u hat 
think ye of Christ ?" and several others ; from 



168 

M , r rr 1 ^ k " Home, the sermon which the author calls 

er's I rial. . ... , ,-^ 

v^y^i " the prevailing intercessor ;' another, "Dan- 
lst Charge, iel is in Babylon ;" another, " the king of glo- 

Testimon r ^ '" ^e ^ w0 ^ rst °^ tnem ' rea( ^ immediate- 
ly between service, on the same Sabbath. In 
the " prevailing intercessor," there was only 
one word changed. 

Mr. E F. Backus, sworn on the part of 
the defendant. 

Def. Do you know any thing of the truth 
of Mr. Cumming's preaching other people's 
sermons ; if so, what do you know ? 

Wit. I never heard Mr. Cumming preach 
but four sermons, as I recollect, two sermons 
from Toplady's works were preached in the 
1st presbyterian church, which as nearly as I 
could recollect, were an exact copy. The 
others I know nothing of. 

merhorn?"" ^' ^ C ^ ermer ^ orn 'J SWOTO On the part of 

teBtimony. the defendant. 

Def. Do you know any thing of Mr. Cum- 
ming's intemperance ; if so, what ? 

Wit. I have seen the man several times. 
Hecame to my father's house in the beginning 
of sleighing, with Dr. Toll ; the first thing he 
called for, was spirits ; he ordered, first, a 
small glass apiece ; they drank it, sat a spell, 
and called for another glass. Mr. Cumming 
wished Dr. Toll to drink some of it ; but he 
did not drink much of it ; Mr. Cumming 
drank the remainder. Before he went away, 
he called for another glass, and drank the 
greater part of it. In going after his coat, he 
staggered considerably ; and in going out of 
the house made considerable of a staggering, 
or reeling. 

Def. Are you a member of a church ? 

Wit. Yes, sir. 

As Mr. Schermerhorn withdrew, Mr.Tuck- 



169 

er informed the court, that he had vet other M , r ' J uc . k " 

* 6r s 1 rifll 

witnesses to introduce, to establish still fur- 



ther, and on other occasions, the fact of Mr. 1st Charge. 
Cumming's intemperance. The moderator Testimon 
said, that he believed the evidence already 
presented to the court, would be deemed suf- 
ficient to establish that fact, so far as the de- 
fendant could be considered as having made 
himself responsible by any thing he had said, 
for its establishment ; and considering the 
apology suggested by Mr. Cumming's alleged 
state of mind, on these occasions, he thought 
that Mr. Tucker ought not to wish to present, 
and that the court ought not to allow to be 
presented any other, or further evidence on 
the article of intemperance, than merely what 
was requisite, as matter of defence on the 
charges now at issue. 

Mr. Tucker said, he did not wish to do 
$o ; that it would be as painful to him to pre- 
sent, as it would be to the court to hear, the 
testimony alluded to. He only wished to es- 
tablish the fact of Mr. Cumming's intemper- 
ance, so far as it was requisite for him to do 
this, in his own defence, on the charge brought 
against him for having slandered Mr. dim- 
ming on that article ; and if the court thought 
the evidence already adduced was sufficient 
for that purpose, he did not wish that his oth- 
er witnesses should be examined ; but if the 
court were not satisfied, he was prepared to 
establish it by other witnesses. 

Deeming the evidence sufficient, so far as 
the defendant was concerned, the court de- 
clined examining any other witnesses. 

SECOND CHARGE. 2d Charge-, 

With falsehood in asserting, that the Rev. 
John Chester, was his author of the report of 
Mr. Cumming's intoxication at Mr. Marvin's. 



Chester's 
testimony 



no 

M , r ' J" c , k " R?v- John Chester, sworn on the part of the 

er's Trial. . 7 * 

v^^^ prosecution. 

2d charge. Com. Do you know anything of the false- 

_ . hood alleged against Mr. Tucker, in this se- 

Testiraony. . . « » 

cond charge ? 
Rev. j. Wit. 1 do not. 

Com. What did you tell Mr. Tucker, that 
Mr. Marvin told you relative to Mr. Cum- 
ming's intern perance at his house; and un- 
der what circumstances did you tell him ? 

Wit I told Mr. Tucker that Mr. Marvin 
told me, that he was convinced, from his own 
observation, that Mr. dimming was in the 
habit of making an unadvised and improper 
use of ardent spirits; and that he had some- 
times drank so much, that he did not think 
it prudent for him to be seen. I communicat- 
ed these facts to Mr. Tucker, under the fol- 
lowing circumstances : it was in my study, 
in a confidential conversation with Mr. 
Tucker, who was the friend of my esteem 
and confidence. I stated it to him, because I 
wished to kuuvv whether such an evil had ever 
been noticed in any other place. I did not 
authorize Mr. Tucker to repeat what I had 
said ; but I do not consider Mr. Tucker as 
having either intentionally, or designedly, be- 
trayed my confidence. 

Cross Examination. 

Def. Did you not tell Mr. dimming, at the 
interview at Mr. Hutton's, that if Mr. Tuck- 
er felt himself at liberty to communicate what 
you had told him, he was justified in saying 
what he did ? 

Wit. I did to that effect. 

Mr. Strong, sworn on the part of the pros- 
ecution. 

Com. Do you know any thing of this se- 
cond charge ; if so, what ? 



m 

Wit Nothing but what I heard from Mr. M , 1 '- T V ck: 

*-, . ° er's 1 rial. 

dimming*. -^-.,^u 

Rev. Jonas Coe, D. D. Dr. Corning, Mr. 2d Charge. 
Bliss, xMr. Hart, Mr. Hutton, Mr. Wisfter, ^^ > 
Mr. Clark, Mr. Cushman, Mr.Kellogo-, Mr. 
Johnson, Mr. Crane, Mr. Lee, Mr. Crosby, 
Mr Adams, Mr. B issett, Mr Marvin, Chan- 
cellor Kent, Miss L. Peck, Miss H. Peck, 
Mrs Marvin, Thomas M Auley, LL. D. were 
respectively examined on this charge, but 
knew nothing. 

THIRD CHARGE. SJ Charge- 

With falsehood in an interview with the 
Rev. H. Cumming and Professor M Auley, 
at Schenectady, January 2, 1817, in a de- 
claration he made to the Rev. H. Cumming, 
in the words following, to wit : "Except the 
Marvin business, I never opened my lips 
against you" ichich was false. 

1st. Because, he had previously at Mr. 
Marvin's, used very abusive language relative 
to the character of the Rev. H. Cumming, for 
which Mr. Marvin checked and reproved him. 

2d. Because, he had previouily slandered 
the Rev. H. Cumming, in a conversation with 
the Rev. Dr. Coe, Dr. Burritt, Mr. Kellogg, 
and Counsellor Bliss. 

3d. Because, he had previously endeavored 
to detach, from Mr. Cumming the affections of 
Jonathan Crane and Samuel Lee, two of his 
elders. 

4th. Because, he had spoken reproachfully 
of the Rev. H. Cumming, relative to his 
drunkenness and plagiarism, to John Piatt 
and wife ; also to Elam Clark and S. Cros- 
by ; also, to Benj. B. Wisner and Samuel 
Davis; Professor M Auley and widow Teller. 

Thomas M Auley, LL. D. sworn on the ? r ; M ' Au ° 

c ., ^. ley's testi- 

part ot the prosecution. mony. 



IIS 

M , r \ T V c . k * Com. Do you know anv thing of the de- 
er's Trial. . . J . J o 

s^s,^, claration on which the falsehood charged in 

3d Charge, this third charge is founded ? 

T ni ^ t ' ' never heard any such declaration. 

Com. Did you ever hear Mr. Tucker make 
to Mr. Gumming, a declaration in any other 
words to that effect ? 

Wit. I will state what I can. Mr. dim- 
ming told him at the first interview that he 
had been circulating many other reports 
against him ; that he could prove it by sev- 
eral members in communion with the first 
presbyterian church in Albany. At the se- 
cond interview, in relation to this part of the 
interview, Mr. Tucker insisted upon Mr. 
Cumming's giving him his author's for these 
alleged reports. Mr. Cumming refused. Mr. 
Tucker plead that it was as necessary that 
he should give his author, as that he should 
give him Mr. Chester for the former story. 
Mr. Cumming still refused. 

Com. Do you know any thing of the first 
allegation under this charge ? 

Wit. I know nothing about it, except what 
Mr. Cumming said, at one of the interviews. 
He told Mr. Tucker that he had spoken so 
abusively respecting him, that Mr. Marvin 
found it necessary to give l)im a severe re- 
proof. I think he said Mr. Marvin told him 
so. 

Com Do you know any thing of this se- 
cond allegation ? 

Wit. Nothing. 

Com. Do you know any thing of this third 
allegation, under this charge ? 

Wit. I heard Mr. Tucker acknowledge to 
Mr. Cumming, that he had told Mr. Crane, 
in the presence of Mr. Lee, of Mr. Cum- 
ming's intemperance at Mr. Marvin's. 



m 

Com. Do vou know anv thing of this M '\J^ c , k - 

,, J ° er's Trial. 

tourth a I leg; tion 7 



/ if. Knew nothing;. Sd Charge. 

Mr. Holiday. Did Mr. Tucker etew?/ his _, 4 . 
having abused Mr. Gumming at Mr. Mar- 
vin's, as stated by Mr. Gumming at one of 
the interviews ? 

Wit He said he had no remembrance of it. 

Mr. Benj. B. Wtsner, sworn on the part 
of the prosecution. Knew nothing of the 
third charge, or of the first, second and third 
allegations under it. 

( om. Do you know any thing of the fourth 
allegation under this charge ? 

li it. I think Mr. Tucker never mentioned 
Mr. Cumming's intemperance, until he relat- 
ed the conversation with Mr. Cumming, in 
the presence of Dr. M'Auley. I don't know 
as Mr. Tucker ever spoke reproachfully of 
Mr. Cumming. Mr. Tucker and myself of- 
ten conversed on the subject, and each ex- 
pressed his opinion freely. 

Mr. Crave, sworn on the part of the prose- 
cution. Knew nothing of the third charge, 
or of the first and second allegations under it. 

Com. Do you know any thing of the third 
allegation under this charge. 

Wit. I do not as it stands ; I do not know 
that Mr. Tucker endeavored to alienate my 
affections from Mr. Cumming, in any thing 
he communicated to me of Mr. Cumming's 
character. 

Witness knew nothing of the fourth allega- 
tion. 

Mr. Lee, sworn on the part of the prose- 
cution. Knew nothing of the third charge, 
or of the first and second allegations under it. 

Com. Do you know any thing of the third 
allegation under this charge. 



Testimony. 



114 

M , r * J^* Wit. I do not know ; it was never my im- 
°^ v ^ pression, that IVJr. Tucker wished to detach 
3d charge, my atl'ections from Mr. dimming ; I can't 
judge his motives. 

Mr. Halutay. Did the information of Mr. 
Tucker, either in whole or in part, detach 
your affections from Mr. Gumming ? 

Wit. That is a hard question to answer. 
These charges were most of them known to 
me previous to the conversation with Mr. 
Tucker ; how far Mr. Tucker's conversation 
influenced my mind, it is difficult to say. 

Rev. Jonas Coe, D. D Dr. Coining, Mr. 
Bliss, Mr. Hart,Mr.Hutton,xMr. Kellogg, Mr. 
Clark, Mr. Cushman, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Cros- 
by, Mr. Adams, Mr. Bassett, Mr. Marvin, 
Chancellor Kent, Miss L. Peck, Miss H. 
Peck, Mrs. Marvin, Rev. John Chester, were 
respectively examined on this charge, and 
each of the specifications under it, but knew 
nothing. 

The minutes of the confidential committee 
were called for, and so much of them was 
read, as contained a written communication 
addressed to said committee, by the Rev. 
Hooper Gumming, in the words following : 
Schenectady, March \2th, 1817. 
I beg leave to state to the committee, ap- 
pointed by the presbytery of Albany, on the 
cases of Messrs. Chester and Tucker, one 
circumstance which escaped my mind yester- 
day. It refers to Mr. Tucker, and is this : 
In the first interview, I had with him, Dr. 
M'Auley being present, Mr. Tucker observ- 
ed, " except the Marvin business, I never 
opened my lips against you." After my re- 
turn from Albany, I told Mr. Tucker, at my 
second interview, that what he stated before 
was false, because Mr. Marvin informed me 



1*15 

on Friday, the 3d of January, that the first, JJj-^jjJj 
and only night, Mr. Tucker lodged in his \^v^ 
house, he used very abusive language in re- 3d charge. 
lation to my character; that Mr. Marvin Testiraony . 
checked and reproved him for the same. Mr. 
Tucker has, contrary to his declaration in the 
first interview, in several instances before that 
time, slandered me in a very gross manner, 
both in this city and in Albany. Witnesses. 
Uriah Marvin, Isaac Button, N. B. Bassctt, 
John Chester, Win. Johnson, Isaac Lucas, 
Richard Duncan, Jonathan Crane, Samuel 
Lee, John Piatt and wife, Lucretia Peck, Han- 
nah Peck, Mrs. T. Marvin, Mr. Elam Clark, 
Mr. Crosby, Mr. Adams, Mr. Wisner, Mr. 
Davis, Mr. Gumming, Dr. M'Auley. 

Signed, Hooper Cummin g. 

All the testimony recorded under the sev- 
eral charges, brought a gainst Mr. MarkTuck- 
er, having been read and considered, and 
the question taken on each separately : 

THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY DECIDED, j|° ^e™ 1 

I. That neither of the charges had been 
made out, on the part of the prosecution. 

II. That it had been made out, on the part 
of the defendant, that what he admits he has 
said relative to Mr. Cnmming's plagiarism 
and intemperance (which is all that has been 
proved) was true, and (hat satisfactory rea- 
sons for saying the same, hove been assigned. 

This court do therefore, wholly acquit the 
defendant of each and every charge brought 
against him. Nothing hating appeared to 
impeach his character either as a christian, or 
as a licentiate ; or to justify the personal in- 
convenience to which he has been subjected, 
during a trial which appears to have been 



no 

^T?*i~ commence d an d prosecuted against him, with- 

<^^ ^' out any justifiable cause. 

3d charge. HALSEY A. WOOD^ 

N. M. WELLS, > Com 'tee. 

REUBEN SMITH, J 

A true copy of the "minutes, 

H. A. Wood, Tern. Clerk. 

SCHENECTADY, APRIL 22d, 1817. 
Presbytery met according to adjournment, 
and was constituted with prayer by the mod- 
erator. 

PRESENT AS FOLLOWS. 
MINISTERS. 

Rev.ELIPHALET NOTT, D.T). Moderator. 
SIMON HOSACK, D. D. 
JOHN CHESTER, 
HALSEY A. WOOD, 
REUBEN SMITH, 
JONATHAN HOVEY. 

ELDERS. 

Ananias Platt, 1st church, Albany, 

John Boardman, 2d church, Albany, 

Alexander Kelly, Schenectady, 

Luther Stiles, Amsterdam, 

John M'Crea, Ballston, 

Ezra Nash, Milton, 
Jonathan I.Clayton, Duanesburgh, 

John Chamberlain, Charlton. 

The minutes of a former meeting of pres- 
bytery, that related to the case of the Rev. 
Hooper Cumming, were read. 
The mode- The moderator (Dr. Nott) remarked, that 
reason^" il was known to presbytery that he had on a 
why he former trial, when the Rev. Hooper Cum- 
contlnue to min g was called as a witness, expressed 
act in his doubts as to his sanity, that he had been im- 
office * peached for having so expressed himself 



Till that impeachment was formally issued, ^^ r ". 
he did not think that it was competent for ai!" 
him on the present trial to sit in judgment. ^^V^ 
At any rate he could not, while under his 
present impressions, consent to sit in judg- 
ment to try the Rev. Hooper Gumming, by 
the same rules by which he should feel bound 
to try another man. And having read a sen- 
tence or two from a letter of the Rev. Hooper 
Cnmmino\s father, he said if the trial was to J''° ™f- 
proceed in its present form, he could not sit signs the 
as a judge, and resigned the chair. chair ' 

The Rev. Mr. Smith being appointed, took 
the chair. 

It was enquired whether the Rev. Hooper 
Camming was present ? Mr. Graham, one 
of the commissioners, declared that he was 
not, and begged permission to read a memo- 
rial from the third congregation ; the motion 
being taken, leave was granted, and Mr. 
Graham proceeded : 

" To the Reverend presbytery of Albany. 

" The memorial of the subscribers in be- A commis . 
half of themselves and their families, inhabit- sioner 
ants of the city of Albany, and attendants on "o^f me " 
the ministry of the Rev. Hooper Cumraing, from the 
in the third presbyterian church in the said M church - 
city, respectfully showeth : 

" Th ;t they have learnt with deep regret 
and mortification that the memorial of the 
commissioners in behalf of the congregation of 
the third church, praying for the immediate in- 
stallation of the Rev.Hooper Cum ming, and for 
a discontinuance of all proceedings against 
him, has not met with that favorable reception 
from the presbytery, which your memorial- 
ists had fondly anticipated. Induced, there- 
fore, by considerations of the greatest import- 
ance, and urged by motives which cannot be 
23 



ins 

Mr. Cum- condemned, vour memorialists, once more, 
ai. beg; leave to approach the presbytery, and in 

^^V^ terms the most fervent and sincere, to call 
froTThe' ^ our a tt en ti° n to a subject, most interesting 
Sd church, to the»n and to the church at large. Your 
memorialists are actuated to this measure , 
not from the feelings of the moment, not by 
popular in pulse, or unfounded prejudice or 
zeal ; but the convictions of their consciences, 
after unwearied and p stient research, and 
cool and dispassionate deliberation. They 
are fully aware of the delicacy and import- 
ance of the subject. They have examined it 
in all its various lights and bearings. They 
have reflected again and again, with anxious 
hopes and prayers, to arrive at a fit and just 
conclusion, and the result is still the same, 
unaltered by all that has been so warmly and 
strenuously urged against it. Your memo- 
rialists therefore approach the presbytery in 
all the honesty and fervor of truth, supported 
only by a zeal worthy of the C"<use they ad- 
vocate. They would be unmindful of the du- 
ty they owe to themselves and to the presby- 
tery, did they not briefly state the causes 
which have produced these convictions, and 
they solemnly appeal to the Judge of all 
hearts, for the purity and uprightness of their 
motives and intentions. 

It is a well known fact, that for many years, 
the first presbyterian church in this city, was 
the only one to which the pious and devout of 
that persuasion could resort. It was soon 
found that a second became necessary for the 
accommodation of the many families who 
wished to attend divine worship. Causes 
not necessary here to be detailed, rendered 
the establishment of a third church in this 
city indispensable. It was soon established. 



n9 

and it was admitted and received under the Mr - , Cum ; 
care and government of the presbytery of Al- ™i!" 3b 
bany. Thus the third presbyterian church ^*vW 
in this city, received a solemn pledge of your ^ Iemo "ai 

i * . . *, . ' from the 

paternal care, protection and regard ; a sa church. 
pledge which your memorialists consider sa- 
cred and inviolable ; a pledge made in the 
presence of an all-seeing God to promote his 
glory, and to increase the number of his 
saints. The congregation was soon formed 
and organized with every requisite and cere- 
mony, that the civil and ecclesiastical laws 
require. There was still one desideratum, 
or pastor, whose services would conduce to 
the honor of his Divine Master, and the wel- 
fare of the flock which should be committed 
to his charge. 

The Rev. Mr. dimming was at this time 
regularly settled in the city of Schenectady, 
in a church over which he had presided for 
nearly two years, with a reputation which had 
not been confined to the narrow precincts 
of a city, but was rapidly extending itself 
throughout the state. Your memoralists, by 
their constituted organs, had made diligent 
enquiry, and believing from the best sources 
of information in their power, that to call the 
Rev. Hooper dimming as their pastor, would 
be a measure conducive to their spiritual in- 
terests, did unanimously call him, which call 
was in due form laid before the presbvtery, 
and received their unanimous vote, that it 
should be pit into his hands for his consider- 
ation and answer. 

The Rev. Hooper Cumming was released 
from his obligations to his church at Sche- 
nectady, and received from that church the 
most honorable testimonials of his character 
and standing as a minister. Thus far no ob- 



18U 



3 . ^ u ™*. stacles had intervened to interrupt the obiect 
ai. in view, lour memorialists had, at a great 



expense, provided a church and made engage- 
Memorial me nts, in full faith that the previous arrange- 
sd church, ments which had been made by them towards 
the final settlement of the Rev. Hooper Cum- 
ming in this city, would be ratified and car- 
ried into full effect. After all these prepara- 
tory measures, after the Rev. John Chester 
had attended a meeting of the congregation, 
to moderate the call of the Rev. Hooper 
Gumming, after the presbytery had received 
the congregation under their care, present- 
ed their call to Mr. dimming for his con- 
sideration, and recorded his acceptance of 
the same on their minutes, without a dissent- 
ing voice, your memorialists were for the 
first time, alarmed with impending difficul- 
ties and dangers, and were tauntingly and 
unfeelingly told that all their labors had been 
fruitless, that their pecuniary engagements 
were to be a burden to them without any 
prospect of relief, and that neither their spir- 
itual hopes could be realized, nor their tem- 
poral interests respected. It is not the ob- 
ject of your memorialists to disguise the na- 
ture, or to examine the origin of those dis- 
putes which have recently become the topic 
of conversation in almost every circle. They 
address you as members of the church of 
Christ, equally interested with themselves, 
for the honor of that cause which is the hope 
of the christian in this life, and the theme of 
his perfect fruition in that to come. And 
your memorialists warmly and zealously at- 
tached to the church of Christ, firmly and 
conscientiously believe that their pastor is in- 
tended, by divine providence, to be of signal 
and permanent usefulness to the church, and 



an instrument to bring many souls into the M . T - ?"»»- 

T-v • LI. -J ni,n g s lrl " 

way of salvation. During the snort period a i. 

of his ministry in this city, a scene has been v^vW 

exhibited, calculated, we humbly hope, to Memorial 

• i \ L • ,.• L from the 

cause the true christian everywhere to Joysj churc h 
and rejoice with us. We have seen not on- 
ly those who formerly belonged to the fold of 
Christ, but a large number of those who 
wandered as sheep having no shepherd, 
crouding together the place where God's ho- 
nor dwells, and where he has promised to 
meet his saints. Nor does it give us pain, 
nor can it, we humbly conceive, give any 
member of the church of Christ pleasure, 
that within the walls of our church, are to be 
seen many, till this time, unaccustomed to 
the sweet accents of the gospel. On the 
contrary, we count it an omen for good, and 
one more proof that God is faithful to his pro- 
mises, and has made him the happy instru- 
ment of reconciliation between man and 
man, and, we sincerely believe, between 
God and men. Your memorialists are fully 
aware under what embarrassments their pas- 
tor has lately been placed. Recent proceed- 
ings of an ecclesiastical nature, as well as 
public rumour, have announced the nature 
and extent of those embarrassments. Your 
memorialists have fully understood, even from 
sources the least friendly to their pastor, and 
without extenuation or excuse, the nature of 
the charges exhibited against him ; and af- 
ter mature and full deliberation, they are per- 
fectly satisfied, that their pastor ought to be 
left undisturbed in his course of usefulness in 
the church, and that your memorialists ought 
not to be deprived of his services among 
them. Painful indeed would it be to a con- 
gregation of more than fifteen hundred souls, 



Mr. Cum- (aiight they be indulged in an estimate) to 
3! n§8 ' n learn that their earnest petitions had been 
^^vW rejected, and that a deaf ear had been turn- 
jNiemonai ec j i their warm and repeated solicitations, 
'U church, more painful still when they should learn 
that such rejection should occur under so 
many exciting causes, which render it diffi- 
cult, if not impossible, to resist the various 
in pression's which may have been made upon 
the mind, and emphatically more painful 
still, when such rejection would cause so ma- 
ny souls to wander without a Shepherd and 
without a fold. Your memorialists cannot 
believe, that these considerations will fail of 
having effect upon the members of the pies- 
bytery. They consider that body, in some 
sense, as the guardians and piotectors of the 
spiritual and temporal interests of the church. 
To assist in the saving of souls, and not in 
their destruction ; to build up and not to 
demolish ; to treat their brethren with ten- 
derness and love ; to exhibit v s> irit of for- 
bearance and charity, and utteily to reject 
any system which tends to distract and to 
divide the church, or to drive from her walls, 
souls which might otherwise have there ex- 
perienced sweet communion and comfort ; 
so dreadful a responsibility they cannot be- 
lieve, will be assumed by any tribunal which 
boasts the christian name. And what, we 
ask, would be the result, the melancholy and 
destructive result, of a policy opposed to the 
principles we suggest ? Would any satisfac- 
tion be derived from the reflection, that the 
libertine, the profligate and the profane, who 
were about to be reclaimed from their vicious 
pursuits, had been driven back again to the 
paths into which they had strayed ? Would 
any christian rejoice, that many, very many, 



183 

respectable and pious families had been left ^ r ■ J 1 "?-, 
without a church, and were deprived of the aV. lSb 
pastor who they felt, and sincerely believed, ^^vW 
vv is the best c ilcul tted to warm their hearts Memorial 
in the duties of devotion, and to lead them to 3d church 
heaven / Would it redound to the christian 
n une, to exhibit to the world the asperities of 
feeling, the collisions of opinion, or the pre- 
judices of the mind, which in the darker 
ages of the world, have made more infidels, 
an 1 produced more wickedness and distress, 
than all the efforts united of the worst ene- 
mies which the cause of Christ has had to 
contend ? Look, we intreat you, at the con- 
sequences of all disputes produced in the 
church, by misguided zeal, or overheated 
prejudice and fanaticism, and they will be 
found to have been destructive to christi in 
charities, and to have greatly impeded the 
progress of the gospel. We do not say, that 
our pastor is without his faults, he is a man, 
in his own unassuming language, he is a . 

young man, who depends on the charity and 
benevolence of christians. Even if he be guil- 
ty, the hand of benevolence would not tear 
open, and cause to bleed afresh, the wounds 
of an amiable man, with a young and amia- 
ble partner and infant, just entering on the 
stage of life. If reports can be relied upon, 
confirmed, however, by recent ecclesiastical 
proceedings in this city, his faults are plagi- 
arism, and denying the charge when made, 
Neither intemperance, nor immorality com- 
pose any p irt of the charges exhibited against 
him. Surely then, reverend presbytery, char- 
ity demands forbearance. We, who have 
seen his labors and discovered his usefulness, 
can justly appreciate those charges. If the 
anticipated examination is intended for our 



184 

Mr. Cum- benefit and instruction, we intreat you to for- 
a"' S . bear. We want no farther light upon this 



part of the subject. We are satisfied ; and 
Memorial a |j we as fc j s to permit him and us to pursue, 
Sd church, undisturbed, those labors and devotions, in 
which we have so deep an interest. As to the 
insinuation of insanity against our pastor, we 
are willing, from the evidence of our own 
senses and observation, to abide the conse- 
quence. We fear it not. But if it be so, it is 
an affliction from the hand of divine provi- 
dence, which we trust will never be made 
the subject of a charge. But we hope, rev- 
erend presbytery, that in this respect you will 
permit us to judge as well as yourselves. In- 
sanity is a subject, which the community can 
ascertain and investigate. If your memori- 
alists are, as a very considerable portion of 
that community are, satisfied that such a 
charge is ill founded, they hope and trust 
their evidence is entitled to some respect. At 
all events, we hope that the reverend preby- 
tery will permit us to be better satisfied be- 
fore we condemn. Thus have we attempted 
tolay before the presbytery some, among the 
many considerations which have induced us 
to pray for the immediate installation of the 
Reverend Mr. dimming, and for a discon- 
tinuance of all further proceedings against 
him. We cannot believe that our petition 
will be rejected. It is painful to contemplate 
even the possibility of such an event. But if, 
in the course of divine dispensations, we shall 
be afflicted with intelligence so painful and 
unexpected, we can only conclude with the 
fervent hope, that the injury which may there- 
by accrue to the church of Christ, will not be 
imputed to improper motives on the part of 
the presbytery. 






185 

•' Signed by and in the name and on the* 1 /; £ u t ^' 
behalf of the third presbyterian church in ui. 
the city of Albany, in pursuance of a resolii- v ^\^*' 
tionofthe21st April, 1817. 

" JOHN M MILLAN, Clerk. 
11 Daniel E. Gregory, Secretary. 
" James Low, Asst. Sec." 

Dr. Hosack, after some remarks, moved 
that the above memorial lie on the table. 
The motion was not seconded. 
On motion of Dr. Nott, the above memo- * efe "** 

. ■ . . . . to a com> 

rial was committed to a committee to report mittee. 
thereon. Dr. Nott and Mr. M'Crea, were 
appointed that committee. 

Dr. Hosack moved, that the Reverend H. 
Cumming, be cited to appear before presby- 
tery, at 9 o'clock to-morrow morning, to an- 
swer to the charges tabled against him ; and 
assigns his reasons for the same. 

Dr. Nott stated, that before presbytery came 
to a decision, he wished to make some fur- 
ther communications of a private nature, and 
moved that presbytery be alone. 

The motion prevailed, and presbytery had In *eriocu- 

. . , r .. ' V J J torymeet* 

an interlocutory meeting. i ng . 

Dr. Nott read a letter from Mr.Cumming's 
father, in the words following : 

" Newark, April 15th, 1817. 
" Dear sir, 

" I have, my dear friend, to thank you a ***** 
thousand times, for the great friendship which cumming' 
you have shewn to my truly unfortunate son, 
and I have deeply to lament and mourn, that 
so little benefit has arisen from all your labors 
of love. Our hearts are sorely wounded, and 
great indeed is our mortification on your ac- 
count, as his unwearied friend, on his ac- 
count as our once very beloved son, for the 



1S<5 

Mr ' ?T- great iniurv he has done to the cause of reli- 

ming's In- ». r -i i ■ 1 1 

ai. gion. I am, however, persuaded, that he 

^^/^ must be under a kind of derangement, and has 
from%en Deen > H1 a greater or less degree, ever since 
dimming, that mournful event, the loss of his wife. If 
this is not the case, he is, of all men, in the 
most deplorable condition. Our heavy af- 
fliction we pray may be sanctified unto our 
souls, and we desire the prayers of Gods 
people for him and for us, on this most mourn- 
ful occasion. 

" I have written to him, and wish you to 
see him and urge him to take the advice I 
have given him. Accept, my dear sir, the 
thanks of the mourning parents for their lost 
child, for your fatherly care of him. Dr. 
Griffin unites his thanks with ours. 

" Yours, most respectfully and affection- 
ately, 

(Signed) J. N. CUMMING." 

Dr. Hosack's motion for the immediate 
citation of the Rev. Hooper dimming, being- 
then fully discussed and the question being 
taken, was lost. 

Dr. Nott then stated to presbytery, that 
he wished they would indulge him at least 
iieiay. with some delay, as he was himself desirous to 
converse more fully with Mr. Cumming; and 
as he had unavoidably a great responsibility 
in the present case, and as delay can produce 
no ultimate injury, because, if presbytery are 
not convinced that his opinion is correct, as 
to Mr. Cum ming's state of mind, they can 
proceed to try him on the present charges. 
He, therefore, offered the following resolu- 
tion : Resolved, that the trial of the Rever- 
tion to" encl Hooper Cumming, be postponed until the 
that effect, first meeting of this presbytery, and that the 



Moderator 
requests 



181 

moderator be directed to put notice thereof Ml - J-'" 1 } 1 : 
into the circular, to convene any meeting ot ; u. 
presbyterv previous to the next stated meet- "^/^ 
ing thereof. And that the clerk be directed 
to cite the Rev. H. Cumming, then to appear 
and answer to the charges tabled against 
him. 

Dr Notts resolution having received con- 
siderable discussion, and the question being 
taken, it was carried. 

The committee appointed on the memorial 
from the third church, reported as follows : 

"The presbytery of Albany, reply to the f SH£ 
memorial and petition of the third presbyte- tee >n re- 
rian congregation of Albany ; that they £*££? 
doubt not that their request for the immediate of the 3d 
installation of the Rev. Hooper Cumming ch, " rh ' 
among them, has arisen from sympathy for 
him, and they therefore cheerfully record it, 
that it may now and hereafter, have its full 
effect. There are however reasons which 
the presbytery trust will have weight, with 
the congregation, for a temporary postpone- 
ment of the question of Mr. Cummings in- 
stallation. 

" The settlement of a minister is among 
the most solemn transactions in which a con- 
gregation are called to engage. You know, 
brethren, the perturbed state of the public 
mind, and whatever anxiety you may feel, 
it would in the opinion of presbytery, be un- 
desirable to approach such a duty at such a 
moment. And besides, we ourselves are 
not at liberty to decide the ultimate question, 
till we are in possession of all the informa- 
tion that ought to influence our decision on it. 
You are now enjoying the labours of your 
pastor elect, and presbytery hope that the 
unavoidable delay of his installation will op- 



18$ 

M i 'vrrii- erate no P erraan ent injury either to you or 
ai' ns8 ' him. And they trust that their own acts, 
v^v^ when they shall be understood, in connection 

fcommit- w ^ a ^ le c » rcumstances which produced 
tee in re- them, will be deemed, if not altogether wise, 
piy to the at least deserving of a charitable construc- 
oftheSd tion. Should they be convinced that they 
church, have erred, they will hasten to correct that 
error. And they assure the third congrega- 
tion of Albany, that they feel a deep interest 
in their welfare, and they will not delay a 
compliance with their request, after existing 
impediments are removed, and the way shall 
be clear for a compliance with their request. 
In the mean time presbytery trust, that that 
congregation will bear their disappointment 
with the patience and humility, and the char- 
ity of christians. 

" With respect to the other requestcontain- 
ed in your memorial, you will receive the an- 
swer of presbytery, in the resolution of pres- 
bytery, a copy of which has already been 
furnished your commissioners." 
The report was accepted, 
interiocn- Presbytery had an interlocutory meeting. 
torymeet- jy r -^ ^ rear j a communication from the 
commissioners of the third church, viz. 
" Messrs. Isaac Hempstid, John T.B. Gra- 
ham, Isaac Lucas, Wm. Eaton, JohnM' 
Lachlin, David E. Gregory, fy Joseph 
T. Rice. 
"Gentlemen, 
Communi- " The meeting held this evening in the 
Secom- 010 tnird Presbyterian church in this city, in ad- 
missioners dition to the proceedings with which you are 
cWh? furnished, have passed the following resolu- 
tions : 

" Whereas a memorial has been prepared 
and approved of by the congregation, pray- 



180 

ing the reverend presbytery of Albany, to in- Mr -^: 
stall the Rev. Hooper Gumming, and to dis- l^" 6 8 
continue all proceedings against him. And *«^vW 
whereas the following persons, to wit : Isaac c °?>muni- 
Hempted, John T B. Graham, Isaac Lucas, tbecom- 
Wra. Eaton, John M'Lachlin, David E. "/"JIJJ™ 
Gregory, and Joseph T. Rice, were appoint- church. 
ed to present the said memorial. 

" Thereupon, Resolved, in case the said 
persons be unable to obtain the objects of the 
said memorial, that then they respectfully 
pr ty the said presbytery to postpone indefi- 
nitely all further proceedings against the Rev. 
Mr. Gumming. 

" We are, gentlemen, vour ob't. serv'ts. 

(Skgned) JOHN MCMILLAN, CA'w. 
" David E. Gregory, Secretary, 
" James Low, Asst. Sec. 

"Albany, April 21, 1817/ 

Resolved, That this paper be recorded. 

A motion was made by Dr. Hosack, and ^ o r n e J 0,u " d 
seconded by Mr. Hovey, that the charge of ding ano- 
intemperance be added to the charges alrea- u ' er 
dy tabled against the Rev. Hooper Gumming, the libel. 
and that the clerk be directed to cite the wit- 
nesses to substantiate the same. 

Dr. Nott moved that the resolution of Dr. 
Hosack be referred to a committee, toconsid- R eferredto 
er whether, under all circumstances, it is the 
duty of presbytery at this time to proceed to 
the prosecution of Mr. Cumming on this ad- 
ditional charge. The motion being seconded, 
was carried, and Messrs. Wells, Smith and 
Nash were appointed. The committee pre- 
sented their report as follows : 

" The committee to whom was referred 
the resolution of Dr. Hosack, for adding the 
charge of intemperance to the charges alrea- 



tee. 



190 

Mr. Cum- ^y tabled against the Rev. Hooper Cum- 

ming's In- •>. , \ , ° r 

ai. ming, beg- leave to report : 

v '^vW That whereas it is now apparent that the 
Co ° , ™ it " r honor of religion and this presbytery require, 
thereon, that the conduct of the Rev. Hooper Gum- 
ming should be enquired into relative to in- 
temperance, which common fame does so 
loudly proclaim. And whereas your com- 
mittee are not in possession of sufficient evi- 
dence, on the subject of Mr. Cum ming's al- 
leged insanity, to lead them yet to concur in 
the opinion publicly expressed by the Mod- 
erator touching that subject, and now re- 
peated to this committee ; they are, there- 
fore, of opinion, that the honor of religion, 
and character of presbytery, do require an 
investigation of this subject, and they there- 
Commit- f ore recommend, that an additional charge 
port re- against the Rev. H. Gumming, in the words 
specting an foii ow j ng: v iz. u Also, with the intemper- 
charge. ate use of spirituous liquor, indicated on some 
occasions, by the quantity of liquor drank ; 
and on others, by conversation and conduct, 
indicative of inebriety and derogatory to the 
ministerial and even to the christian charac- 
er," be added to the charges already tabled 
against him. Witnesses to support the charge, 
Daniel I. Toll and Mr. Clute. 

On motion, Resolved, that the above re- 
Thc report por t De accented. That the same committee 

accepted ; r . I . i • i 

a charge of be continued, and that it be their duty to 
mtetuper- ma fc e ou t a complete list of witnesses, and 

ance add- r ' 

ed. transmit the same to the temporary clerk ; 

whose duty it shall be to furnish the Rev. 
H.Cumming, with a certified copy of all the 
proceedings of presbytery, relative to this ad- 
ditional charge, and to cite him, in the name 
of this presbytery, to appear at their next meet- 
ing and answer the same. 



commit- 
tee to con- 



191 

Dr. Nott requested presbytery, that acorn- J* r -* ,u ™ 
mittee be appointed to converse with the Rev. a i b 
H. Camming, relative to this charge, before 
the same be formally acted upon ; and that A 
if he shall give such explanations, or declare verse" with 
himself willing to make such concessions, as Mr.Cnm- 

,,,.,. ° . . , , mine there- 

Shall, in their opinion, go to save the honour on. 

of religion without a formal trial, that the 
clerk may, at their request, withhold the ci- 
tation until the next meeting of presbytery. 

Mr. Wells and Mr. Piatt were appointed 
the committee. 

Adjourned. Closed with prayer. 

Schenectady, July 24, 1817. 

The presbytery of Albany met on the call 
of the moderator, expressed in the following- 
circular. 

" Having been requested by two ministers, c,rcuIa . r 

i »' ' convening 

and two elders, to convene the presbytery or presbyte- 
Albany in Schenectady, for the purpose of ry " 
issuing the trial of the Rev. Hooper dimming, 
and of attending to such other business as 
may regularly come before them ; you are 
hereby notified, that the said meeting will 
be held in Schenectady, on Thursday, July 
24th, at 2 o'clock, P. M. when you are re- 
quested to attend. 

(Signed) ELIPHALET NOTT, Jfod." 

July 2d, 1817. 

PRESENT AS FOLLOWS. 
MINISTERS. 

Rev. ELIPHALET "SOTT^.D. Moderator. M mh 
SIMON HOSACK, D. D. of "the 6 " 

JOHN HALIPAY, court 

REUBEN SEARS, 
JOHN CHESTER, 
NOAH M. WELLS, 
DANIEL O. GRISVVOLD. 
ARTHUR I. STANSBURY. 



* Ir VT Rev HOOPER CUMMING, 
S mg ' JONATHAN HOVEY, 
^v^ HALSEY A WOOD, 

Members REUBEN SMITH. 

of the 

court. ELDERS. 

Ananias Plait, 1st church, Albany. 

Chester Bulkley, 2d church, Albany. 
Aaron Hand, 3d church, Albany, 

Alexander Kelly, Schenectady, 
Israel Collins, Amsterdam, 

Samuel D'Forest, Ballston, 
Ezra Nash, Milton, 

David Allen, New-Scotland. 

Read the minutes of the last meeting. 
At the request of commissioners from the 
third church, Albany, presbytery had an in- 
terlocutory meeting. 

The committee appointed at the last meet- 
ing of presbytery, to converse with Mr.Cum- 
ming, on the additional charge of intemper- 
ance, included in the libel preferred against 
him, reported as follows : 

The committee appointed to wait on the 
Rev. Hooper Gumming, relative to the charge 
of intemperance beg leave, to report : 
Report of " That they waited on Mr. Cumming. and 
the com- requested a private interview with him, which 
poiitedTo ne declined, stating that he would have no 
converse private conversation with any committee from 
CumJing. P res bytery. The committee then, in pres- 
ence of Mrs. Cumming and John T. B. Gra- 
ham, Esq. enquired of Mr. Cumming wheth- 
er he had received any communication from 
Mr. Wood, as clerk of presbytery, relative to 
the charge of intemperance being tabled 
against him ; he informed us he had. The 
committee then stated to him, that their com- 
mission was in some measure superseded 
since he was already in possession of the 



19S 

charge. The question was then asked, wheth- Jf£ J^. 
er the express object of the committee was ai. 



to obtain from Mr. dimming, a confes- 
sion of this crime ? Jn answer the committee ^3 P c ° r ^° f 
stated, that a confession from Mr. dimming mitteeap- 
(if he knew himself guilty) would stop the J^ e to 
process now in train. He declared himself with Mr. 
entirely innocent of the alleged charge of in- Cummin S' 
temperance, and that it had originated in a 
spirit of marked hostility against him, and that 
he would never appear before presbytery to 
answer to such allegations, as it was evident 
that he could get no justice in that body. 
(Signed) N.M WELLS, \ Com'te 

ANNAN1AS PLATT, \ ^ omte - 
Mr. Aaron Hand, the elder present from 
the third church, Albany, requested that Mr. 
J. T. B. Graham, be admitted for the pur- 
pose of reading certain documents addressed 
to presbytery. 

Leave having been granted, Mr. Graham 
was admitted, and read the following : 

" At a meeting of the male members of the Resoiu- 
third presby terian Congregation of the city of Jj "J ^.{J * 
Albany, convened in their church on the 23d appointing 
July, 1817, agreeable to notice given from 1 s f " is ' 
the pulpit. 

" Mr. M'Millan, being called to the chair, 
and John T. B. Graham, Secretary ; the fol- 
lowing resolutions were unanimously adopted : 
" Resolved, That twelve commissioners be 
appointed to attend the presbytery, to con- 
vene in Schenectady, on the 24th inst. and 
assist in conducting the trial of the Reverend 
Hooper Cumming, and that the following 
gentlemen comDrise said commissioners, John 
V. N. Yates, J. T. B. Graham, James War- 
ren. Joseph Frey, John M'Lachlin, Garrit V. 
Z. Bleecker, Matthew Gregory, David E. 
35 



194 

M . r - , c " m : Gregory, Joseph T. Rice, Isaac Hempsted, 
ai. Asher Kiley, Solomon Southwick. 

^^•v^ " Resolved, That placing the fullest confi- 
dence in the ability, integrity and discretion 
of the above named commissioners, we will 
faithfully sanction the course they or a major- 
ity of them (as circumstances may require) 
shall pursue. 

" Resolved, That the proceedings be signed 
by the chairman and secretary, in behalf of 
this meeting. 

(Signed) " JOHN M'MILLAN, Ch'n. 
" J. T. B. Graham, Secretary." 

Dedara- " On Wednesday, July 23d, 1817, 
tionb/the " The male members of the third presbyte- 
3d church r i an congregation, in the city of Albany, met 
opinion of iu their church in pursuance of public notice 
Mr. Cum- previously given, and after having appoint- 
ed commissioners to attend the Rev. Presby- 
tery of Albany, at Schenectady, on the 24th 
instant ; they proceeded to express their 
sentiments, in relation to their beloved pas- 
tor, the Reverend Hooper Cumming, in man- 
ner following, viz. 

" The sentiments of the congregation unan- 
imously remain unaltered. Their feelings 
toward their minister are what they were at 
the date of, and as expressed in, the memo- 
rial which our commissioners presented to the 
presbytery at their last meeting. Our respect, 
confidence and affection for Mr. Cumming 
are constantly increasing, insomuch that no 
event would be considered by us more de- 
plorable than his separation from us. 

" By order of the congregation, passed 
unanimously. 

(Signed) « JOHN M'MILLAN, CA'». 
" J. T. B. Graham, Secretary. 

" 1 certify that the meeting at which the 



195 

foregoing sentiments were expressed, was MrCufn- 

J c 1.1 u • mine's Tri- 

very numerous and perfectly harmonious. a i. 
(Signed) " John MMillan, Cha'n." ^v^ 
Mr. Graham having withdrawn, Mr. Hand 3d church 
stated officially the request of the third Stale 
church, that all further proceedings against p r °ceed- 
the Rev. Hooper dimming be stayed, and iufye/and 
that he be forthwith installed. In supporting "*r. Cmn- 
the above request the elder produced a letter SaifeJ 11 
addressed by the Rev. E. D. Griffin, D. D. 
of Newark, (N.J.) to the elders and trus- 
tees of the third church, and dated the 17th 
instant, which was read, and is as follows • 
" Newark, ( N. J.) July 17, 1817. 
"■ Gentlemen, 

" Your favour of the 12th inst. wasreceiv- fromD^ 
ed. You and Mr. Gumming only do me {iri ^ n - 
justice in believing that for the ' welfare' of 
your ' beloved pastor' I have ' ever been so- 
licitous.' He is to me as a son, and a son 
tenderly beloved. 1 have wept over his mis- 
fortunes, and next to his own parents have 
suffered more, I suppose, than any one else, 
in his sufferings. Before the shock which he 
received from the lamented death of his wife, 
no young man was more deliberately prudent 
and correct in all his conduct. He was un- 
der my eye for about four years, and for a 
considerable part of that time was my pupil 
and lived under my roof, and I can truly say 
that he was beloved, in no ordinary degree, 
by all thatknew him. That his mind received 
a shock by the misfortune above alluded to, 
which in a considerable degree unsettled him, 
I and his other friends who have watched 
him, and have had the best opportunity to 
judge, possess the fullest evidence The 
charge, and the facts which we have witness- 
ed, would, I am persuaded, leave no doubts 



196 



31 r. ( 'u tu- 
rning's Tri 



on the mind of any physician in America, 
As the effect of the shock was but partial, we 
have fondly hoped that with kind treatment, 
fromDr ^e wol, ld altogether recover ; and as it has 
Griffin re- arisen from overwhelming affliction, we know 
Mr C Cum- tnat tr0UD ^ e added to grief would only increase 
rabg. the malady. We have believed that he 
needed the balm of sympathy and kindness, 
rather than the rod of discipline, and have 
learned from experience, that the latter does 
hurt, rather than good. It is a grief to me 
that Mr. Cumminghas been ever the occa- 
sion of division and contentions in the church ; 
I pray God that these unhappy wounds may 
be healed ; I should be pained if any men 
should suffer by these means. It is not for 
me to make any suggestions to influence 
your presbytery, in whose, piety and wisdom 
I have much confidence. I can only say that 
if I was a member of that body, I should vote 
in favour of suspending all discipline ; and I 
will add, that I believe every member of that 
venerable body would be of the same opin- 
ion, if they had been in a situation to know, 
all that I have known of the case. 

" I have respectfully weighed your request, 
that I would attend the meeting of presbyte- 
ry next week. After every view which I 
have been able to take of this subject, my 
impression is, that such a measure would do 
no good, but would really do hurt. This is 
also the opinion of Mr. Cumming's parents ; 
you must therefore excuse me from this step. 
Wishing you the divine presence and direc- 
tion, I am, gentlemen, with much respect, 
your obedient servant, 

(Signed) " E. D. GRIFFIN." 

" To Messrs. Aaron Hand and Isaac Lucas, 
eiders of the third prestyterian congregation 



in Albany ; and Messrs. John Shaw, John* 1 ?- T CuDa : 

M'Lach/in, James Gumming, J. Warren,™"** 

Hugh Humphrey, and Joseph Hay, trus- s^v%* 

tees of said congregation." 

He also stated that the father of Mr. Cum- ^ r -^ a e n f 
ming had been at his house, and declared respecting 
that at times his son had been deranged ; Mr:Cnm- 
that an elderof Mr. Cumming's former church sanity. ' 
in New- Jersey affirmed the same ; and that 
he (Mr. Hand) now believed it himself. That 
he believed Mr. Cumming was deranged 
when presbytery last sat at Albany for the 
trial of Mr. Chester, having seen proofs in 
his behaviour of such a state of mind ; but 
since that time he has seen nothing in Mr. 
Cumming's conduct, but what was perfectly 
correct, and that he believed from his con- 
versation and conduct, that Mr. Cumming 
was a christian. 

At the request of Mr. Hand, it was moved 
and carried, that Mr. Isaac Hutton be intro- 
duced as a witness, on the subject of Mr. 
Cumming's insanity. 

Mr. Hutton was introduced accordingly, 
and having been solemnly sworn, deposed as 
follows : 

?' I have had but one opinion respecting 
Mr. Cumming's insanity. I have long be- 
lieved, and do still believe, that Mr. Cum- 
ming has been partially deranged ; and as- 
cribed the impropriety of his conduct to that 
cause. I have myself seen but one instance 
in Mr. Cumming's conduct that had the ap- 
pearance of insanity ; my opinion is formed 
from the instances that have been related to 
me." The following question was proposed 
by Mr. Chester. 

Ques, Can you state any particular time 



198 

Mr. Cum- or pi ace j n w hich vou supposed he was not in 

tiling's In- , . *~ . , .„*' , rr ,i_ .. „ 

ai. his true mind ; it so, when and where was it ? 

^v^ To which Mr. Hutton replied : 

Testimony ^ m « At my own house, on the day he 

Mr. Cum- was said to have preached Toplady's sermon ; 

niing'sin- there appeared to be a wildness in his con- 
sanity. , r r . 11. • i . ft 
duct, as though his mind was not perfectly 

right." 

The following question was then proposed 
by Mr. Chester : 

Ques. Did you at such time suppose that 
he was not a moral agent, of course not ac- 
countable for his actions ? 

Am. " I should not judge that his insani- 
ty was such as to destroy his moral agency, 
but I overlooked his conduct on that consid- 
eration." 

Mr. Hutton having retired, presbytery had 
a recess till half past seven o'clock. 

At the close of the recess, presbytery met 
and proceeded to business. 

Mr. Cumming read, and laid on the table 
of presbyterv, the following communication : 
" Schenectady, July 24'h, 1817. 
Communi- " To the Reverend presbytery of Albany, 
drelse/to " The Rev. Hooper Cumming feels thank- 
presbytery ful to the moderator, for the suggestion that 
coming. ne should be indulged with the privilege of 
offering any remarks he wished, on the sub- 
ject of Mr. Hand's request. 

" He gladly embraces the opportunity af- 
forded of reducing his observations to writing. 
" It is his fervent desire to be at peace with 
all men. He longs for the blessings of min- 
isterial communion with his brethren in Al- 
bany. He deeply regrets that any circum- 
stances should have arisen to obstruct a free 
interchange of social and ministerial offices. 
." It is moreover his ardent prayer, that 



199 

harmony may be restored to the agitated, **£ f s u ,J? r " 
districted churches in Albany. The members a i. 
of the third congregation are very desirous 



that such an even should transpire. They c ° mmu . ni - 

t-i. i i l • ^ cation from 

are already much inclined to do every thing Mr. Cum- 
in their power to effect the object. Mr. Cum- mins * 
ming believes, that not a little of this spirit 
has, under God, originated in his numerous 
exhortations to brotherly love. Nothing would 
give hi n more heart-felt joy, than to become 
reconciled to all those whom he has consider- 
ed his enemies. He can appeal to the search- 
er of hearts, that there is not a man on earth, 
toward whom he indulges feelings of hatred ; 
that there is not a man on earth whom he can- 
not fold to his bosom. 

" He desires to be on terms of the most 
perfect good understanding with all his breth- 
ren of the presbytery. When convinced that 
he has injured one of them, or any other in- 
dividual in the world, he is willing at once 
to give the utmost christian satisfaction. 

" These are the reasons which convince 
him that it is desirable, to arrest all fuither 
proceedings on his case, and proceed forth- 
with, to his installation. 

" In regard to the charges which have 
been tabled against him, he remarks, that 
as to plagiarism, if he thought that he had 
made an improper use of other men's compo- 
sitions in his sermons, he would freely ac- 
knowledge and deplore it. He has purchas- 
ed a large and valuable library for the pur- 
pose of reading it, and improving by the pe- 
rusal. He deems it perfectly lawful to em- 
body in his productions, the ideas of other 
men, but the order, the arrangement, the 
language should, and shall be, his own. 

'•'• Respecting breach of promise alleged 



$00 

Mr, ? u ™". against him, he observes, that he has not 7 
ai. since a member of this body, violated the en- 

^^v^ gagement he entered into with the presbyte- 
SSnfrom r y °^ ^ erse y» * n regard to the use of other 
Mr Cum- men's sermons. 

ming. << ^ s j t reg p ec t s the charge of falsifying the 

truth, by stating that the manuscript ser- 
mons, which he delivered in Albany, February, 
1816, had been put into the hands of Chan- 
cellor Kent, who acquitted him of the charge 
of plagiarism, he does most solemnly and une- 
quivocally aver, and would do it on his death 
bed, that he has not the faintest recollection, 
ever to have said so. In the month of April, 
1816, Miss Abigail Steele, a sister of Mr. Web- 
ster, on a visit to my family, stated that the 
Chancellor had declared I was not a plagiarist. 
This observation I have since repeated ; but 
I do not at all remember, that I ever had any 
conversation with Mr. Webster, or any other 
person, on the subject. I have enquired of 
my wife, who dined with me at Mr. Webster's 
at the time alluded to, whether any conver- 
sation took place on the subject ; and she 
does solemnly declare that she heard none. 

" In regard to the 4th and last charge, 
which is intemperance, Mr. Cumming re- 
marks that this is among the least of his 
temptations. His animal spirits are apt to 
overflow. Men little acquainted with him 
have, no doubt, often thought that those spir- 
its originated in the application of artificial 
stimuli ; but, Mr. Cumming positively as- 
sures this presbytery, that he has not been in- 
toxicated since he was ordained a minister. 
The trials through which he has been called 
to pass, since February of this year, have put 
him, peculiarly, on his guard in respect to an 
indulgence in extraordinary cheerfulness, and 



301 

have made him more than ever, careful to Mr Cum- 
maintain that gravity, which became the min- ail" 6 S 
Lsterial character. s^yV 

" Mr. Cumming further remarks, that the 
reason why he did not attend the last meet- 
ing of presbytery, was, that he had thrown 
himself in the arms of his beloved people, who 
advised, without a dissenting voice, that he 
should remain at home. His feelings toward 
the presbytery were at that time very un- 
pleasant. He rejoices in being able to state, 
that he now indulges sentiments entirely the 
reverse, and trusts, that such will be the 
course of measures as to justify and increase 
this state of mind. 

" All which is most respectfully submitted. 

(Signed) » HOOPER CUMMING." 

On motion of Mr. Wells, certain extracts 
from the minutes of the presbytery of New- 
Jersey, having respect to former conduct of 
Mr. Cumming, and bearing on the question 
of his sanity, were read, as follows : 

Minutes of the Presbytery of Jersey. 

Morristows,Dec. ISth, 1814. 

Mr. Keene, elder from the 2d church, Newark, ask- Extracts 
ed supplies for that congregation, on the ground that ""JJ 
their minister, Mr. Cumming, had declared, that he was of Jersey 
no longer their pastor, and had accordingly ceased to pres J 1 *'?' 
perform ministerial duties among them. 

The following letter, addressed to the moderator of 
presbytery, was received and read, viz. 

Newark, Dec. 1st, 1814. 
Reverend and Dear Sir. 

I wish you to inform the presbytery of Jersey, at 
their next meeting, that I consider myself as no longer 
one of their members. For more than two months past, 
my mind has been called to the study of church govern- 
ment. 

The result is, a deep-rooted conviction, that neither 



30$ 

Mr. Cum- the word of God, nor early and authentic history, afford 
mmg s 11- a warrant f or presbyterianism. This, added to the cru- 
\^^/^ el treatment which I formerly experienced, and to the 
Extracts encouragement given to the minister of the first church 
^inuteiT * n tn * s town » st *^ to persecute and revile me, induces me 
of Jersey to withdraw from your connexion, and to declare my- 
presbytery, se if no longer amenable to your authority. It will, there- 
fore, be altogether vain for the presbytery to address 
any communication to me, as I shall pay no regard to a 
single one of their injunctions. 

On the next Sabbath, with the permission of my Divine 
master, I shall preach my farewell jjfcermon to the dear 
church am^ongre|ation, over which I have, for more 
than thrgjt years, presided. 

Accept, my dear sir, the assurances of my high es- 
teem, and warm affection. 

Tender them, also, to my friends in the presbytery ; 
and declare, in my name, to my enemies, that I sincere- 
ly forgive them all their offences. 

(Signed) HOOPER CUMMING. 

The presbytery proceeded to deliberate on the let- 
ter from Mr. Cumming. Each of the members were 
called upon, in the order of the roll, to express their opin- 
ions of the course which the presbytery ought to pur- 
sue in this affecting business. In the progress of this 
deliberation, it was stated, by several members, that re- 
ports were in circulation unfavorable to the moral cha- 
racter of Mr. Cumming. 

The presbytery then appointed Mr. Armstrong and 
Mr. John M'Uovvell, a committee to draw up a minute 
on this subject, embracing the sentiments expressed by 
the members generally, and to report to-morrow morn- 
ing. 

December 14£/t, 1814. 
The committee appointed to draw up a minute, em- 
bracing the sentiments expressed by the members rel- 
ative to the course which the presbytery ought to pur- 
sue in regard to Mr. Cumming, made a report, which be* 
ing read, and amended, was adopted, and is as follows, 
viz. " That, considering the circumstances in which Mr. 
Cumming has attempted to cast off the authority and 



£03 

withdraw himself from the connexion of the presbytery, Mr. Cum- 
while his moral character labours under the imputation "j ing s n " 
of gross and scandalous misconduct, and has been stat- v^py*^ 
ed to the presbytery ; while he was evidently under the Extracts 
apprehension that charges of immorality would be exhi- lr ? m y* 
bited against him, it is, therefore, the indispensable du- f Jersey 
ty of the presbytery, in the first place, to institute an presbytery 
enquiry on this subject, and call Mr. Cumming to an- 
swer to the charge which, in common fame, lies against 
his moral character, in the case of his reporting the votes 
for a president of the auxiliary bible society in Newark, 
and its vicinity ; and for preaching the sermons of oth- 
er men, and this too, with aggravated circumstances of 
guilt. And inasmuch as the letter he has addressed 
to the presbytery, at the present meeting, seems evident- 
ly inconsistent with christian candour and meekness, 
and contrary to his solemn promise at the time of his 
ordination, to be subject to his brethren in the Lord, and 
contains, also, slanderous imputations against a mem- 
ber of this presbytery, implicating, likewise, in an un- 
charitable manner, the conduct of the presbytery, it is 
therefore the duty of the presbytery to call him to an- 
swer for his unchristian conduct in these particulars 
also. 

Your committee, therefore, recommend that the pres- 
bytery appoint a time and place for the purpose, and 
cite the Rev. Hooper Cumming to appear before them, 
and answer to the following charges, viz.* 

I. That he acted dishonestly, and did virtually falsi- 
fy the truth, in reporting the votes for president of the 
auxiliary bible society of Newark, and its vicinity, in 
June or July last. 

II. That he has been guilty of preaching the sermons 
of other men, and this too, with aggravating circumstan- 
ces of guilt. 

III. That he has treated the presbytery in an unduti- 
ful and contemptuous manner, in violation of his ordina- 
tion vows and obligations, and has wickedly slandered 
one of the members of the presbytery, in his letter re- 
ceived by the presbytery at their present meeting ; and 
as Mr. Cumming has expressed in his letter, a resolution 



304 

Mr. Cum- to pay no attention to any thing the presbytery may say 
ming s n- ^ ^j m on ^. g su jjj ec ^ -^ w jj| ^ e expedient to appoint a 
V*rv**^ committee of three members of the presbytery, to serve 
Extracts him with the citation, and labour with him, to bring him 
minutes' to a sense °f ^ s duty, m this matter, 
of Jersey Resolved, That the presbytery will meet at Elizabeth- 
presbytery, town, to attend to this business, on the first Tuesday of 
January next, at three o'clock, P. M. 

Resolved, That the moderator issue his citation to the 
Rev. Hooper Cumming to appear before the presbyte- 
ry, at the time and place above mentioned, to answer to 
the charges above specified ; and that he also issue his 
citation to the following witnesses, to appear also, at the 
above time and place, to give testimony in the above 
charges, viz. on the first charge, Henry Mills, William 
Ward, Ephraim Beach, Moses Lyon, James Crane, Cal- 
vin S. Crane, and George P. Downing. 

On the second charge, John C. Burnet, Aaron Ward, 
John Taylor, Henry Mills, Philip C. Hey, and Rev. 
Enoch Burt. 

On the third charge, Mr. Cumming's letter. 
Resolved, That Mr. Chandler be appointed to supply, 
in the second church, Newark, on the fourth Sabbath in 
this month, and Mr. M'Dowell, the first Sabbath in Jan- 
uary ; Mr. Condit and Mr. Thompson, ministers, and 
Mr. Steel, elder, were appointed a committee, to serve 
Mr. Cumming, and the witnesses, with a copy of the ci- 
tations, and to labour with Mr. Cumming to bring him 
to a sense of his duty in this matter. 

Elizabethtown, Jan. 3d, 1815. 

The committee appointed to serve Mr. Cumming and 
the witnesses with a copy of the citations, and t» labour 
with Mr. Cumming to bring him to a sense of his duty, 
reported, that they had performed the duties assigned 
them. 

Mr. Cumming appeared in the presbytery agreeably 
to the citation served upon him. Mr. Joseph T. Bald- 
win and Mr. Joseph L. Keene, appeared in presbytery, 
as commissioners from the second presbyterian church 
in Newark, and requested a dissolution of the pastoral 



20& 

relation, between the Rev. Hooper Gumming and that Mr. Cum- 
ming's Tri- 
congregation. a l. 

They proceeded to deliberate on the mode of pro- v^yV 
ceeding, in prosecuting the charges exhibited against Extracts 
the Rev. Hooper dimming, when some members of ^°™^ es e 
presbytery stated in their place, that there is reason to of Jersey 
believe, that Mr. Cumming has been, at times, for some presbytery, 
time past, in a state of partial derangement: it was 
therefore on motion, Resolved, That the presbytery do 
inquire into this matter, previous to trying the charges 
exhibited against him. 

Citations were issued to the following persons to give 
testimony in this case, viz. General John N. Cumming, 
Joseph T. Baldwin, Aaron Ward, Dr. James Lee, Da- 
vid Doremus, Abraham Miller, Col. James Hedden, 
John C. Burnet, and Dr. John Ward. 

The presbytery having examined under oath, Joseph 
T.Baldwin, Gen. John N. Cumming, and Rev. Uzal 
Ogden, adjourned to meet to-morrow morning, at nine 
o'clock. 

January 4th, 1815. 

The minutes of the last session were read ; the pres- 
bytery proceeded in the examination of witnesses on the 
subject of Mr. Cumming's partial derangement. The 
following witnesses were examined, viz. Mr. Joseph L. 
Keene, Mr. Aaron Ward, Mr. John Chandler, jun. Dr. 
James Lee, Mr. John C. Burnet, Mr. George R. Down- 
ing, Mr. Samuel H. Cox, Rev. Stephen Thompson, Rev. 
Thomas Picton, Rev. John M'Dowell, Rev. Daniel A. 
Clark, Mr. Lewis Atterbury, Rev. Gershom Williams, 
Rev. Cyrus Guildersleeve, and Rev. James Richards. 

The whole of the testimony recorded on the subject 
of Mr. Cumming's partial derangement was read. 

After prayer for divine direction, the presbytery pro- 
ceeded to deliberate on the testimony. The members 
were called upon, in the order of the roll, to express 
their opinions on this subject. The presbytery having 
heard a few of the members, adjourned to meet to-mor- 
row morning at nine o'clock. 

January 5th, 1815. 

The members of the presbytery, proceeded, in the 



£06 

Mr. Cum- order of the roll, to express their opinions on the sub- 
ming's Tn- j ec |. Q |- jyj 1% c umm i n g' S partial derangement. After long 
■^r^' deliberation on the subject, it was on motion, 
Extracts 1st. Resolved, That from a deliberate view of the 
from the whole testimony now before the presbytery, in the case 
minutes ,»*'■„ • ,. • *. j. f. r 

of Jersey of Mr. dimming, there exist strong symptoms of a par- 
presbytery tial derangement. 

2d. Resolved, That in view of the above decision, it 
will not be proper to proceed to the trial of Mr. dim- 
ming, on the charges exhibited against him. 

3d. Resolved, That the witnesses be dismissed, and 
the charges be hereby withdrawn. 

4th. Resolved, That while the presbytery deeply re- 
gret the circumstances of this case, they feel themselves 
constrained to declare, that they do not consider Mr. 
Cumming in his present state of mind, duly qualified 
to perform ministerial duties, nor can they countenance 
his being employed in their churches, until the presby- 
tery shall receive satisfactory evidence of a favorable 
change. 

Ordered, That the testimony taken, in this case, be 
put upon the files of presbytery. 

Resolved, That the pastoral relation between the Rev. 
Hooper Cumming and the second church, Newark, be 
dissolved, and it is hereby dissolved, agreeably to the 
request of the commissioners from said church, the 
father of Mr. Cumming concurred in the same, and the 
congregation is hereby declared vacant. 

Newark, June 20th, 1815. 
The following communication was received from the 
Rev. Hooper Cumming, viz. 

To the presbytery of Jersey. 
Having given you much uneasiness, on former occa- 
sions, I should not venture, at this time to trouble you, 
but for the confidence I have in your lenity and chris- 
tian benevolence. 

My heavy and oft repeated afflictions have, while dis- 
turbing my repose, and giving my mind an unaccustom- 
ed direction, ruffled my spirits, excessively agitated my 
feelings, and produced a hurry, a rapidity, an incohe- 
rence and inconsistency, which did not mark my deport- 



301 

uoent in former days. These things I do most fervently Mr. Cum- 

deplore ; in every review of them, I am humbled and ™' n S s "* 

sincerely grieved ; it pains my heart, to a degree I can v^y^»> 

never express, that I have wounded the cause of my Extracts 

dear Redeemer. I shall carry with me to my grave the f, '? m * lle 
J jo minutes 

bitter remembrance, that on my account the way of f Jersey 
truth has been evil spoken of. presbytery 

I trust, my fathers and brethren, that whenever con- 
vinced of having sinned against God, and his church, I 
mourn and repent ; and that I deeply and constantly re- 
gret all those instances, in which, though not self-pos^ 
sessed and deliberate, my conduct has been reproachful 
to the christian name. In view of the past, I do most 
heartily desire, during the remainder of my days, to be 
known as altogether devoted to my master's work ; that 
his grace being sufficient for me, I may be exemplary, 
penitent, humble, and faithful, and not distinguished, 
alas ! as heretofore, for waywardness, inconstancy and 
indiscretion. 

It is the object of my present application, to obtain a 
removal of those obstacles, which as far as the opinion 
of the presbytery operates, lie in the way of my fu* 
ture comfort, tranquility and usefulness in the church. 
While impressed as you declared yourselves to be, in 
January last, you could consistently have done no less, 
than avow an opinion, and record it on your minutes; 
that during the continuance of the state of mind, under 
which I then laboured, I was not duly qualified to dis- 
charge ministerial duties. You also declared, that you 
" could not countenance my being employed in your 
churches, until the presbytery should have received sat- 
isfactory evidence of a favorable change." The justness 
of this decision I do not controvert. As a judicatory 
of the christian church, you acted consistently with your 
impression. And I trust that the same spirit will now 
operate as powerfully in my favor ; for you cannot be 
disposed to add affliction to affliction, and when in the 
view of those who best know me, I afford some presage 
of future usefulness in the ministry, you will not mar my 
prospects and give me up to despair. 

I feel it important to remove, for a period, from the 



SOS 

Mr. Cum- scene of my past troubles, and to seek a station more con- 
niing s n- (j uc j ve ^ tranquility of mind. For, though I am now 
N^ry^^ surrounded by the most affectionate relatives, and a large 
Extracts circle of tender, sympathising friends, yet my confirmed 
from the health requires a change of objects, and when I enter on 
of Jersey that change, I wish every impediment, in the way of mv 
presbytery, usefulness, removed ; every thing which tends to agi- 
tate and distress, as far as possible, done away. I anx- 
iously desire to be engaged in doing good. An unem- 
barrassed opportunity of being thus employed, will, 
as I verily believe, contribute more than all things else, 
to that thorough and permanent restoration, which eve- 
ry individual, actuated in his feelings toward me, by 
christian benevolence, must desire. I am gratified in 
trusting, that this presbytery will do nothing, that has a 
tendency to prevent so beneficial a result. 

If I know my own heart, the prominent desire, which 
urges me to the present application is, that I may have an 
opportunity of convincing the world, that I am an hum- 
ble, and conscientious, and devoted minister of Christ. 
For success in this effort, I think I am deeply convinc- 
ed, that all the springs of my strength are in the free 
and sovereign, and special, and constantly exerted grace 
of God. To Jehovah-Jesus, I look for help, believing 
that he, the King of Zion, never turns a deaf ear to the 
ery of the poor and contrite spirit. 

In reviewing the past, I not only feel an ardent, and 
inextinguishable desire of reformation, but cherish one 
sentiment in regard to others. It is my heart's desire to 
be at peace with all men, and to have every thing un- 
pleasant between me and others, adjusted according to 
the gospel. As far as my efforts can be successful, when- 
ever convinced of what is my duty in any individual 
case, nothing shall be wanting decisively to evince by 
my conduct, the sentiment just expressed. 

I shall, to my dying hour, regret the manner in which 
I withdrew myself from your body, not so much on ac- 
count of personal consequences, as because I am now 
convinced of what I did not then see and feel, the sin- 
fulness of precipitately and disorderly withdrawing from 
any denomination, I ought to have affectionately request- 



$09 

ed of you a regular dismission, to attach myself to that Mr. Cum- 

class of christians, in regard to whose views of church- ™,' ng s "" 

government my mind was at that time favorably impress- \^y^ 

ed. It is now my deliberate wish, to be under the watch, Extracts 

and to receive the counsels, of my fathers and brethren . m * he 
J minutes 

of this presbytery. of Jersey 

Whatever may be my decision, in regard to the place P^^Mery. 
of residence I shall select as the scene of my future la- 
bors, one thing I cheerfully promise, that, until this bo- 
dy shall willingly give me an honorable dismission and 
a recommendation to some other presbytery, I shall deem 
it a privilege to be under their care, and subject to their 
calls. And I do humbly trust, that they will not find 
me refractory, or in the smallest measure disposed to 
give them any further trouble. 

"Whatever may be the issue of the present application, 
I beg the favor of having this letter recorded on your 
minutes, that as they contain much, discreditable to me, 
they may bear testimony to my change of purpose and 
demeanor. I am, fathers and brethren, with much res- 
pect and affection, your afflicted friend and servant. 
(Signed) HOOPER CUMMING. 

The presbytery proceeded to receive testimony rela- 
tive to the present state of Mr. Cumming's mind; Gen. 
John N. Cumming, Dr. James Lee, Mr. Joseph T. Bald- 
win, Mr. Robert Cumming, Mr. Aaron "Ward, Mr. Jo- 
seph L. Keene and the Rev. Uzal Ogden, were duly 
sworn, and gave in their testimony, which was ordered 
to be put on the files of the presbytery. 

After deliberating some time on Mr. Cumming's case, 
presbytery appointed Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Riggs and Mr, 
J.M'Dowell, ministers, and Mr. Wilcox and Mr. Potter, 
elders, a committee to take the matter into considera- 
tion, and report to-morrow morning. 

June 9.1st, 1817. 

The committee appointed to consider Mr. Cumming's 
case, brought in their report. After a discussion of the 
report, at some length, it was agreed to postpone the 
further consideration of it until the first Wednesday of 
July next, in order to obtain further information. Mr, 

27 



310 

Mr. C uiu- Thompson and John M'Dowell were appointed a com- 
miDg s r - m - ttee to i^a^g f ur ther enquiry, concerning the state of 
\^V«W Mr. Cumming's mind, and report at the next meeting. 

Extracts — 

)rom the Newark, Jult 5th, 1815. 

minutes 

of Jersey The committee appointed at the last meeting of pres- 

presbytery. bytery to enquire respecting the state of Mr. Cumming's 
mind, reported, that they had attended to the duty as- 
signed them, and mentioned the result of their enqui- 
ries, and the names of persons on whom the presby- 
tery might call for further testimony. 

The presbytery proceeded to receive additional testi- 
mony, relative to the state of Mr. Cumming's mind, when 
Capt. Lewis Bosworth, Mr. Elias Boudinot, Mr. James 
Glass, Mr. Abraham Cross, Mr. Richard Leaycraft and 
Richard Cononer, a free black man, being duly sworn, 
gave in their testimony, which was ordered to be put on 
the files of the presbytery. 

Gen. John N. Cumming and Mr. Robert Cumming 
were heard in addition to their testimony, at the last 
meeting of presbytery, and their testimony, also order- 
ed to be put on the files of the presbytery. Presbytery 
proceeded to review all the testimony respecting the 
present state of Mr. Cumming's mind, and to consider 
the report, on this subject, submitted at the last meeting 
of presbytery, which report being duly considered, was 
adopted, and is as follows, viz. 

The committee appointed to consider Mr. Cumming'* 
case, reported, that from the written communication of 
Mr. Cumming, and the testimony given in before pres- 
bytery ; they are happy to find, that there are indications 
of his returning fast to a sound state of mind ; but they 
judge that the time since these favorable symptoms have 
been manifested, has been too short, to warrant the pres- 
bytery, at present, to remove wholly, the restrictions un- 
der which they have placed him. But as they feel a 
strong desire to give every encouragement to Mr. Gum- 
ming, consistent with their duty to the church, and as 
he wishes to spend some time within the bounds of the 
presbytery of Albany, where the presbytery have heard 



an 

there appears to be an opening for his being'occasional- Mr. Gai- 
ly employed with usefulness- Therefore, JJ7 8 b 

Resolved, That Mr. Cumming be permitted, until the \^y^ 
next stated meeting of presbytery, to preach the gospel Extracts 
within the bounds of this presbytery, or of the presbyte- J^^ 6 
ry of Albany, in a vacancy, or otherwise, as often as he of .Jersey 
may be regularly invited so to do, by any minister of P reslj y ter y 
either of these presbyteries. 

Resolved, That the stated clerk transmit to the Rev. 
Dr. Nott, of Schenectady, an attested copy of minutes of 
this meeting, relative to Mr. Cumming's case, together 
with a copy of the decision of presbytery, in January 
last. 

Orange, Oct. 3d, 1815. 

Mr. Cumming, who at a late meeting of presbytery, 
under certain restrictions, was permitted to preach un- 
til the present meeting, appeared before presbytery, and 
prayed that all restrictions might now be removed, and 
he be restored to a full and good standing, as a minister 
of Christ. Two letters from Dr. Nott, to members of 
this presbytery, and a letter from Mr. M'Auley, profes- 
sor of mathematics and natural philosophy, in Union 
College, were read, certifying, that Mr. Cumming, since 
he has been in Schenectady, as far as his condnct had 
come under their observation, had conducted himself in a 
manner, rational and circumspect. 

A paper was also read from Dr. Nott, certifying that 
at a regular meeting of the presbyterian congregation 
in Schenectady, of which Dr. Nott was moderator, a call 
was unanimously voted for Mr. Cumming, and that at 
the same meeting, a committee of three was appointed to 
prosecute this call. Mr. Price, one of this committee, 
and a member of the presbyterian church in Schenectady, 
appeared before presbytery, and also testified to the 
exemplary conduct of Mr. Cumming, while in Schenec- 
tady, after hearing the members in the order of the roll, 
express their opinions, this subject was referred to a com- 
mittee, consisting of Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Picton, 
ministers, and Mr.Riggs, elder, to report to-morrow 
morning. 




312 

October 4th, 1815. 

The committee appointed to consider Mr. Cumming'S 
application reported, that having carefully considered 
all the circumstances of the case, with the testimoni- 
als offered in support of Mr. Cumming's request, his re- 
quest ought to be granted, and he be considered as a 
presbytery, minister in good standing with this presbytery, which re- 
port was accepted and adopted, and Mr. Cumming is 
hereby restored to a full and good standing as a minis- 
ter of Christ. 

The Rev. Hooper Cumming requested to be dismiss- 
ed with a view of joining the presbytery of Albany ; 
whereupon the presbytery agreed to dismiss him, and 
he is hereby dismissed and recommended to the pres- 
bytery of Albany, as a member in good standing with us. 

Having compared the above with the original, I certi- 
fy that it is a true copy of all the records of the pres- 
bytery of Jersey, relative to the Rev. Hooper Cum- 
ming, from Oct. 6th, 1813, to the present date. 
THOMAS PICTON, 
Stated Clerk of the presbytery of Jersey. 

June 20th, 1817. 

Moderator Whereupon, the moderator stated, that in- 
reads other asmuch as the minutes of the presbytery of 
from""^ Jersey had been read, he deemed it to be his 
sey. duty to lay before the presbytery, certain tes- 

timony transmitted to him from the father of 
Mr. Cumming, which he also read, as fol- 
lows : 

Mr. Joseph T. Baldwin, being duly sworn, deposed 
Testimony an d said, I never saw any thing improper in Mr. Cum- 
ulating to ming, until after the death of his wife. After that 
ming's^da- event » frequently when I was in company with him, he 
rangement. would manifest much dejection, and suddenly, a light- 
ness of conduct unusual for persons in a sound state of 
mind. 

Question. Did you ever see any thing in his public 
performances which indicated insanity ^ 



.hnwer. No ; except when he touched on his troubles. Mr- (-'um- 
He was then vehement, and appeared to lose himself. ™j' nes "* 

Qms. What is your opinion with respect to Mr. Cum- v^v^* 1 

ming^a Banity ? Testimony 

J><>\ I have supposed him, sometimes, in a partial from ,7 f r " 
rr * scy relat- 

derangement. ing to Mr. 

({u*s. Has this opinion been generally prevalent in ( ' umm 'ug'8 
his congregation ? incut!" 6 

Jins. I have heard it frequently suggested. 
General John A*, dimming, being duly sworn, de-. 
posed and said : my son, from his youth, was obedient 
and affectionate, until the death of his wife. After this 
event, he was, for some time, exceedingly dejected. 
He then became very trifling. He had been very care- 
ful of horses ; after this, he injured them by driving ; 
and, when spoken to on the subject, seemed uncon- 
scious of it. Mrs. Cumming and myself frequently ex- 
pressed our fears on the state of his mind. He seemed 
to lose his natural affection, and could not bear advice 
or reproof. He used to be deliberate in his motions, 
and conduct ; became rapid and precipitate. Former- 
ly, he was economical ; after the death of his wife, he 
became extravagant ; acted without reflection, in re- 
nouncing his charge ; next day he applied to the Bishop 
of New-York for orders. The Bishop has expressed his 
opinion, that, in his conversation and conduct, while in 
his company, he acted like a deranged man. Before the 
loss of his wife, he was in feeble health ; since, he has 
complained of nothing, and nothing appears to fatigue 
him, or injure his health. He used to be peculiarly at- 
tached to his mother, but now seems to have no more 
regard for her than another person. 

Ques. Have you ever heard his mother say that she 
would be very unhappy, if she did not suppose him de- 
ranged ? 

Jlns. Yes. 

Qwes. What is your opinion with respect to your son's 
insanity ? 

Jlns. I have seen him, at times, when I supposed him 
very flighty ; again, at times, he has appeared to be per- 



214 

JSfe. Cam- fectly rational; but never, since a short time after the 

™ 1n S' s death of his wife, has he put on that steady deportment, 

<s^V^/ which he formerly manifested. 

Testimony Ques. Has he lately manifested vital piety as former- 

from Jer- j i 

sev rclat- J ' 

ingtoMr. Ans. Seldom. 

Cumming's # er# j) r , \j za l Ogden, being duly sworn, deposed 

men" 20 " and said, That he had noticed inconsistences in his 
conversation ; particularly, that he had heard him de- 
clare, that he was no presbyterian ; and in the same 
conversation, express a wish to be dismissed from this 
presbytery to join the presbytery of New-York ; and 
again, in the same conversation, that he did not wish 
to join the Episcopal church, but to form a church to his 
own mind. 

({lies. What is your opinion with respect to Mr. Cum- 
ming's sanity ? 

Ans. From common report, and from the instances 
above mentioned, I suppose he has been partially derang- 
ed, since the death of his wife. 

Mr. Joseph L. Keene, a member of the session of the 
2d church, Newark, being duly sworn, deposed and said* 
that he had been much embarrassed on this subject, and 
had sometimes been ready to suppose that he was de- 
ranged ; again that he was not. In conversing %vith him 
about his withdrawing from the presbyterian connexion, 
he appeared to be flighty. He said he was clear of the 
presbytery by the steps he had taken, and that the pres- 
bytery would take no further notice of him. It is my 
opinion, that he has, ever since the death of his wife, 
been at times, more or less, deranged. 

Ques. Have you perceived any difference between the 
conduct of Mr. Cumming in the meetings of session be- 
fore and after the death of his wife ? 

Ans. Yes ; since, he has appeared to be, at times, con- 
siderably excited, and a trifling thing would carry away 
his mind ; but when serious subjects were introduced, 
he would appear to be more composed. 

Mr. Aaron Ward, a member of the session of the 2d 
church, Newark, being duly sworn, was asked : 



315 

i(ues. Do you think that Mr. Cuinmiug has been in a Mr. Cum- 

sound state of mind? a " 

Jus. I do not know that I have. v^vW 

Qiies. Have you perceived any difference in Mr. Cum- Testimony 

ming, in meetings of session, before and after the death jT^JJj. 

of his wife ? ing to Mr. 

Jlns. No more in session than out. I have perceived tu,um,n S* 

r . derange' 

a general difference in his conduct; not that steadiness m ent. 

as formerly. 

Mr. John Chandler, Jun'r, being duly sworn, depos- 
ed, and saith, that he had heard Mr. dimming preach 
his farewell sermon ; and he denounced some doctrines, 
such as those whicli made God the author of sin, and that 
a person to be a christian, must be willing to be damned. 
I was surprised, that he should renounce these doctrines, 
which I supposed he had taught; I went to his study 
and conversed with him on this subject; he said that he 
had never taught, but had always opposed them. 

He further said, that he had been acquainted with 
Mr. Cumming, while a student at Andover, that there his 
conduct was consistent, and such as became a christian ; 
but, that since the death of his wife, he had noticed in- 
consistences in his conduct and conversation. 

Dr. James Lee, being duly sworn, deposed and said, 
that he had been acquainted with Mr. Cumming, but a 
short time previous to the death of his wife. From his 
acquaintance with him, he judged his conduct to be con- 
sistent as a christian, a minister, and a gentleman. 
Shortly after the unfortunate event, he saw a change, 
His mind was hurried, and he would suddenly go from 
one subject to another. He observed him closely, as a 
friend, and professional man, and came to the conclusion* 
that his mind was unhinged ; he acted from the impulse 
of the moment, and frequently with indiscretion and 
inconsistency, and as though reason was dethroned. 
He has continued to make his observations to the pres- 
ent time, and his conclusion is, that he is not perfectly- 
sane. 

Mr. John C. Burnet, a member of the session of the 
2d church, Newark, being duly sworn, deposed, and said, 



316 

Mr. Cum- that there has been a change in his conduct since the 
!Jj! 9 ' death of his wife ; cannot tell from what cause. 

In session, while business was going on, he appeared 



Testimony rational, and could discuss a subject better than any of 
sev^elat" us " When there was no business, he would appear to 
iog to Mr. be trifling, and tell jocose anecdotes; he has observed a 

ummiog's striking difference, since the death of his wife ; there 
derange- B . 

ment. has been a levity and want of consideration not mani- 

fested before. 

Mr. George R. Downing, being duly sworn, deposed, 
and said, that he had conversed with him on religious 
subjects; sometimes he appeared rational and instruc- 
tive ; again he appeared strange ; he would frequently 
drop the subject, and introduce something trifling. We 
talked to him about his trifling ; he appeared to pay but 
little attention to it. About a week ago, he had a con- 
versation with him coming from New-York ; he was very 
solemn. He has frequently made up his mind that he 
was deranged, and has mentioned the opinion to others. 
Again, he appeared so rational, that he did not know what 
to make of him. 

He came into his shop, sometime ago, and put an el- 
egant seal and key on his watch-chain, and in a trifling 
manner observed, how will it do for a clergyman, with 
these, to go into the pulpit, and preach from the words, 
" Be not conformed to this world ?" 

A few days after he called and purchased the seal he 
put on his watch. 

Mr. Samuel H. Cox, on his solemn affirmation, said, 
that he was with Mr. Cumming on a sailing party, in 
company with a number of gentlemen and ladies, to San- 
dy-Hook, during his suspension. His conduct was ex- 
ceedingly trifling on the passage, so much so, that sever- 
al of his church members reproved him ;he made, in the 
water on the beach, an improper exposure of his person, 
in the presence of several ladies, and seemed to be un- 
conscious of his situation. He has, since the death of his 
wife, been much more trifling than before. His opinion, 
ns to his sanity, has been fluctuating, though upon the 



whole, he is inclined to think that he is not perfectly Mr. Cuav 
sane. niing's tri- 

Rev. Stephen Tlwmpson, a member of presbytery, be- *^_ t 
ing duly sworn, deposed and said, that before his sus- Testimony 
pension, at his house, he was speaking of his persecution from Jer- 
in Newark, witness suggested whether it might not be "JJ^'m'p 
owing to his imprudence, and mentioned an expression, CummingV 
which, it was said, he used in prayer. Mr. Cumming Jeran 6 e - 
seemed surprised, and observed, with a sigh, that he 
was a queer fellow ; and further said, that his spirits 
were artificial. 

Rev. Thomas Picton, a member of the presbytery, 
being duly sworn, deposed and said, that in the win- 
ter of 1813, when there was a revival in Mr. Cumming's 
congregation, witness, together with the moderator, 
•went to Newark, according to previous appointment, to 
preach in Mr. Cumming's pulpit; that previous to go- 
ing to public worship, they retired to Mr. Cumming's 
study for prayer, in which Mr. Cumming officiated. 
That the prayer, considering the peculiar circumstances 
of his congregation and the occasion, was so remarka- 
bly short and inappropriate as to strike the attention of 
witness, and was the subject of private conversation be- 
tween him and his colleague that evening ; and that 
there was a want of gravity aud solemnity in his de- 
portment which the occasion seemed to require ; that 
after his suspension, about August or September, 1813, 
Mr. Cumming visited witness, and spent the day with 
him ; that he appeared to manifest a surprising insensi- 
bility of the situation in which he was placed by the act 
of presbytery ; that, about July or August, 1814, wit- 
ness visited Mr. Cumming and conversed with him on 
the subject of some new difficulties ; that witness was 
highly gratified with the calm, meek, humble and for- 
giving temper manifested by Mr. Cumming ; that about 
two weeks afterwards, he visited him again, and ob- 
served that Mr. Cumming appeared, at times, to be 
somewhat insensible of his situation, while in a subse- 



Mr. Cum- quent part of the conversation, he appeared to be great- 
miag s n- jy emDarrasse d ant i distressed. 
S^V^ (Signed) THOMAS PICTON. 

Testimony Rev. John M'Dowell, a member of this presbytery, be- 
lYomJer- j n „ ^^ sworn> deposed and said, that before Mr. 
ing to Mr. Cumming's marriage to his first wife, he was on a mis- 
Cumming's 9 i on f ^ wo we eks with him in Rockland county, (N.Y.) 
ment. that in that journey, he observed frequently, an impet- 
uosit} r , rashness, imprudence and imperiousness in his 
conduct, which astonished him ; that witness frequent- 
ly expostulated with him in vain ; that they were to- 
gether in the sleigh, and the snow left them ; that Mr. 
Cumming determined to go home in the sleigh without 
consulting witness ; that witness expostulated against 
Mr. Cumming's taking his horse ; but notwithstanding, 
he would and did take him, to go to Ramapough, in 
the latter end of the week, and left witness at New- 
Hampstead, where he was to preach on the Sabbath, ten 
miles distant, without any conveyance to get to him on 
Monday morning, when they were to set out for home. 
Witness was obliged, after preaching on Sabbath, te 
get a man to carry him to Ramapough, that he might be 
ready to set out for home with Mr. Cumming on Mon- 
day morning. After they reached home, Mr. Cumming 
wrote to witness, acknowledging that he had acted 
wrong, and asked forgiveness ; witness was placed fre- 
quently, in this tour, in such unpleasant situations, that 
he determined, on his return, never again, if he could 
avoid it, to go out with Mr. Cumming on a similar mis- 
sion, and expressed this determination to several per- 
sons. He had no idea, at the time, that there was any 
derangement in Mr. Cumming. 

Rev. Daniel A. Clarke, a member of presbytery, being 
duly sworn, deposed and said, that he was with Mr. 
Cumming, at Andover ; that he was esteemed pious ; 
but then he manifested, in a degree, a rash and over- 
bearing spirit ; but the students had no idea that it arose 
from derangement, WheB he went into New-England. 



£19 

after Ins suspension, he gave out as the reason why he Mr. Cum* 

did not preach, as witness understood, that his physi- a] ' 5 s 

cian had forbklden it ; since his restoration, he request- < ^rv^»' 

eii witness to preach for him, while he went to supply Testimony 

at New-Hampstead or Haverstraw, promising witness, [ ro . m, | er .* 

of his own accord, that he would give him whatever ing to Mr. 

compensation he might get. ^'hen he returned, he ^ umrain g'? 

r © o derange- 

came to his lodgings, and thanked him for supplying meat. 

his pulpit ; but said nothing about compensation. 

(lues. Have you observed any difference between Mr. 
Cumming's conduct, before and since the death of his 
wife ? 

Jlns. I have observed since, a surprising independ- 
ence, as though he cared nothing for the opinion of the 
world, and a surprising insensibility to his embar- 
rassments. 

»Vr. Lewis Atterbury, being duly sworn, deposed, 
and said, that in conversation with Mr. dimming, he 
always appeared rational and collected, but several in- 
consistences of conduct, of which he was said to be 
guilty, seemed like derangement ; although he supposed 
that many of them might be accounted for from the vex- 
ations which he has been subjected to, especially from 
some members of his congregation. 

Rev. Gershom Williams, moderator of the presbytery, 
being duly sworn, deposed, and said, that shortly after 
the death of Mr. Cumming's wife, he lodged at his fa- 
ther's ; Mr. Cumming was late in rising ; his father 
mentioned it to him in an affectionate manner ; his re- 
ply, to witness's surprise, was tart. After his suspen- 
sion, he went to see him ; he was astonished at his want 
of sensibility of his situation ; shortly before his restor- 
ation, he came to see witness, who rode out with him ; 
he drove rapidly, and witness began to suspect that he 
was partially deranged ; witness observed his eyes, 
which appeared to flash and wink very rapidly. 

Rev. Cyrus Guilder sleeve, a member of presbytery, 
being duly sworn, deposed and said, that he was with. 
Mr. Cumming, at Mr. Thompson's, on a preaching tour 
before hi? suspension : there he appeared cheerful. 



230 

Mr: Cum- but nothing attracted his particular notice. Next day 
wing s rr- w ^ ness was w j t j 1 j 1 j m a f. jy| r Williams's, there he 
\^rv>^ appeared exceedingly light, and witness felt distressed, 
Testimony and mentioned it to Mr. Williams. In the church he 
from Jer- wag so i emn . Witness had no thought, at the time, of 
ing to Mr. derangement. 
Cumming's R eVt j ames Richards, a member of presbytery, being: 

dprHnt?A" 

ment. duly sworn, deposed and said, that a short time after the 
death of Mr. Cumming's wife, he observed a great levi- 
ty in his conduct, within six weeks, he became attentive 
to a young lady in witness's house. Witness talked to 
him, seriously, on the impropriety of his conduct, and 
was thanked by Mr. Cumming for his advice. At his 
father's, witness charged him with a falsehood, and told 
him that the charge certainly could be substantiated ; he 
appeared entirely unmoved. Again, in company with 
Mr. Spring, witness called upon him, and charged him 
with falsehood. After sometime he was brought to con- 
fess his guilt and profess penitence. This was the 
day that Mr. Cumming went to Connecticut-Farms 
with Mr. Guildersleeve. Witness suggested to him that 
it was reported, that he had taken a certain discourse 
from Bradbury. Mr. Cumming submitted it to exami- 
nation, and convinced witness that the report was un- 
founded. Mr. Cumming promised he would never again 
preach other men's sermons. Mr. Spring closed the bu- 
siness with solemn prayer. Next day Mr. Cumming, as 
he since confessed before presbytery, preached this dis- 
course at Springfield, and according to his confession, it 
was taken from Toplady. 

Mr. John Chandler, Jun'r, being called again, the 
question was put to him, whether he was in college with 
Mr. Cumming ? 

Jlns. Yes ; in the sophomore class when Mr. Cumming 
was in the senior. 

(lues. Did Mr. Cumming bear the character in college., 
of having a general disregard to truth ? 

Jlns. Not that I know of. 

Ques. Had he the character of being precipitateand 
overbearing? 



Jks. He was very active in his motions, and he was Mr. Cum- 
, , • mine's Trf- 

also overbearing. ai ° 

Dr. Ogden further testified, that Mr. Cumming, above s^y^f 
a year since, owed him a little more than 100 Dollars ; Testimony 
that Mr. Cumming drew a note in his own hand, payable from Je """ 
in one year, with interest. Witness assigned this note j ng to Mr. 
to a grocer. After the note became due, the grocer in- Cumroing's 
formed witness, that Mr. Cumming had refused to pay Jg™" 56 " 
him interest, alleging that he could prove, by two of 
witness's daughters, that he was to pay no interest; 
when witness's daughters were not present during the 
giving of the note, and knew nothing of the tenor of the 
transaction. 

JMr. R'eene, being called again, said, that in Septem- 
ber, after the death of Mrs. Cumming, he went, in compa- 
ny with Mr. Cumming, to Metuchen, on horseback; that 
Mi*. Cumming, on the way, frequently would start, and 
run his horse, and act in a trilling manner, until witness 
was ashamed of him. On the way back.he, several times, 
touched witness's horse, secretly, with his whip, and 
made him start. Witness frequently complained of him ; 
but he denied it. Witness has seen, in his study, many 
whips and canes of an expensive kind, and has talked 
with him about it. 

Rev. Stephen Thompson, being called again, said, that 
when he visited Mr. Cumming to cite him to attend tri- 
al, he was sensibly affected by his gay and cheerful air, 
which formed so striking a contrast with the distress of 
his friends. When Mr. Cumming expressed his inten- 
tion to attend the trial, witness remarked that cunning 
turn which he showed in explaining his letter to presby- 
tery, which is a frequent character of insanity. When 
asked to explain this clause in his letter to presbytery, 
" It will be altogether vain for the presbytery to address 
any communication to me, as 1 shall pay no regard to a 
single one of their injunctions," he gave this explanation 
that he meant to say, that he would attend to no instruc- 
tion respecting presbyterianism, having already made 
up Ins opinion on this subject. 



Mr. Cam- The above is a true copy, from papers on the tiles, 

nwng s n- Q ^ ^ ie w | 10 j e testimony taken before the presbytery of 

\^y^/ Jersey, at Elizabethtown, (N. J.) on the 3d and 4th of 

January, A.D. 1815, relative to the state of the Rever- 

end Hooper Cumming's mind. 

(Signed) THOMAS PICTON , Stated Clerk. 

Westfield, (N.J.) May 26th, 1817. 

Extracts from the minutes of the associate 
reformed presbytery of New- York, contain- 
ing the testimony of Rev. Messrs. Clark and 
M'Leod, in relation to certain declarations of 
Mr. Cumming, made to them ; and also, ex- 
tracts from the minutes of the presbyte- 
ry of Philadelphia, containing the testimony 
of the Rev. Dr. Neil, touching certain ac- 
knowledgments, made by Mr. dimming to 
him, were read as follows : 

J, . Extract from the minutes of the associate reformed 

Extract 

from the presbytery of New-York, in session at Newark, on Tues- 

miuutes of ([ay the 15t } 1 fay Q f Apr ii 1817> 

the flssoci- 

ate reform- The following communication from the presbytery of 

ed presbyt- Albany, was read, and laid upon the table, 
iff York. " The Reverend Presbytery of Albany, request their 
brethren of the associate reformed presbytery of New- 
York, to take the testimony of the Rev. John X. Clarke 
and the Rev. Robert B.E. M'Leod, on the following points, 
and forward the same to them by the earliest opportu- 
nity. 

" Questions by the presbytery of Albany to the Rev. 
John X. Clarke. 

" 1. Did you ever have any conversation with theRev* 
Hooper Cumming, relative to a report, of his having 
preached Toplady's sermons in Albany ? 

" 2. Did he say any thing relative to his manuscript 
having been submitted to Chancellor Kent, to compare 
with the printed sermons of Mr. Toplady ; and if so* 
what is ail he said on that subject? 



233 

- We wish the Rev. Robert B. E. M'Leod to answer Mr. Cum- 

ming'sTri- 
the same questions. a j 

" By order of the presbytery of Albany. v^V*W 

Attest. « JOHN CHESTER, Stated Clerk." Extract 

Resolved, That the request of the presbytery of Alba- m ° nutes e f 
hv be granted, and that this presbytery now proceed to the associ- 
take the testimony therein desired. edVresbvt* 

The Rev. Mr. Clarke having been requested to with- ery of 
draw, the Rev. Robert B. E. M'Leod was, by oath, purg- N « York - 
ed of malice against the Rev. Hooper Cumming, and al- 
so of expecting to reap any advantage, directly or in- 
directly, from the testimony to be given. 

The witness was then solemnly sworn, and the first 
question, contained in the communication, put him 
by the moderator, viz. 

Ques. Did you ever have any communication with the 
Rev. Hooper Cumming, relative to a report of his hav- 
ing preached Toplady's sermons in Albany ; if so, did 
he admit, vv did he deny, the truth of that report ? To 
which the witness answered : 

" Mr. Cumming was at the house of Robert Blake, 
where I board, nearly a year ago ; after other conver- 
sation, I asked him in relation to a report tiien in cir- 
culation, of his having preached Toplady's sermons. 
The words of his reply I do not recollect ; the strong im- 
pression on my mind is, that he denied having preached 
Toplady's sermons. On this, I put to him a question, 
the substance of which is as follows : " If you have not 
preached Toplady's sermons, why do you not publish 
those you did preach, and thus satisfy the public?" To 
this question Mr. Cumming replied, in substance, to the 
following effect : " I intend to publish them, and have al- 
ready submitted the manuscripts to Chancellor Kent." 
The impressions on my mind, farther, is that Mr. Cum- 
ming said, that Chancellor Kent manifested his surprise 
that any such reports, as these alluded to, should be in 
circulation. 

* This I believe to be the substance of the conversa- 



2&# 

Mr. Cum- tion between Mr. dimming and myself on this subject, 
ming s n- rj^ e conversation was of some length, 
v^v^rf (Signed) « ROBERT B. E. M'LEOD." 

Extract The Rev. John X. Clarke was then called in, and hav- 

fr.om the r imr been in like manner purged of malice, and solemnly 
minutes of ° r » j 

the a«soci- sworn, the same questions were put to him by the mod- 
ate reform- er ator,as to the former witness. 

ed presbyt- _ . • ■»«■«•' i 

ery of To the first question, respecting Mr. Cumming's de- 

N.York. nial or acknowledgment of having preached Toplady's 
sermons, the witness answered : 
" He denied it." 

To the second question, the witness replied : 
" Mr. Cumming said that he had put the manuscript 
of the sermon rumoured to be Toplady's into the hands 
of the Chancellor ; that the Chancellor had compared 
the manuscript with Toplady's sermons, and had found 
no resemblance between them ; moreover, that the pro- 
posals for publishing this his sermon were in the hands 
of some bookseller in Albany, and that in a short time 
the community would be able to judge for themselves. 
(Signed) "JOHN X. CLARKE." 

Ordered, that a copy of the above testimony be for- 
warded by the clerk, to the clerk of the presbytery of 
Albany. A true extract. 

ARTHUR Jo. STANSBURY, 
Clerk of presbytery. 

At a meeting of the presbytery of Philadelphia, held 
April 15th, A. D. 1817. 

The Rev. Dr. Neil being duly qualified, made to the 
following questions, contained in the letter from the 
presbytery of Albany, the following answer, viz. 

1st. Did the Rev. Hooper Cumming, after the report 
became current of his having preached Toplady's ser- 
mons in your late church at Albany, ever converse with 
you on the subject ? 

Ans. He did. 

2d. Where and when did he converse with you ? 

Ans. In my study and about one year ago. 



*25 

M. Did he tell you in that conversation, that the re- Mr - Cum -. 
port of his having preached Toplady, was unfounded ? ™ a& 8 

j£n$. I think he said it was in a great measure un- «^y^ 
founded. Extract 

4th, How far did he admit that he had made use of from , lhe f 

minutes ot 
Toplady on that occasion ? the pres- 

.1ns. That lie had adopted Toplady's plan, and, per- jgJ^J J f 
haps, used some of his ideas. phia, 

5th. Did he not admit, that even in making use of 
Toplady as far as he did, he had done wrong ? 

.his. I think he did. 

6th. Did he not say that he would not in future, make 
so free use of other men's sermons, as he had of Topla- 
dy's, on that occasion ? 

JIhs. I do not recollect his using that expression in so 
many words ; but understood him to intimate a hope, that 
the occurrence might be useful to him in future. 

rth. Did you communicate the substance of this con- 
versation to some of your christian friends ? 

Jlns. I did, but cannot now say to whom. 

8th. Did you not accompany the communication you 
thus made, with an expression of your hope, or belief, in 
consequence of the concessions he made, and the pur- 
pose of amendment he expressed, that what had taken 
place would be of service to him, and that he would not 
do the like again ? Jlns. I believe he did. 

" Any other testimony, touching the case, is respect- 
fully requested to be taken and forwarded immediate- 
ly." To which notice the witness answered, " As the 
conversation was incidental, or at least, unsought by me, 
many particulars have escaped my memory." 

The foregoing testimony having been read to Dr. Neil, 
was by him approved and subscribed. 

Ordered, that the stated clerk furnish the presbytery 
of Albany with a copy of this minute. 

A true copy. 

Attest GEORGE W. JANVIER, Stated Cl'k. 

Philadelphia, April 16, A. D. 1817. 

Done in the presbytery of Philadelphia, this 16th day 
of April, 1817. C. S. ELY, Moderator. 

29 



336 

^ r - ^ u ^ - . On motion, the request of the third church 
wings n ^ dispensing with Mr. Cumming's trial, and 
v^v^. proceeding to his installation, together with 
Petition of a [i the documents, read in support of the same, 

3d church „ . ' ' r ' 

referred to were referred to a committee, consisting ot 
acommit- the Rev. Messrs. Hosack and Wells, with el- 
der Deforrest. 

The committee to whom was referred the 
request of the third caurch, with the accom- 
panying documents, present the following re- 
port : 
Commit. Your committee, after the examination of 
tee's re- theabove papers, and weighing the unwritten 
information which appeared before them, are 
constrained to express it as their opinion, that 
the request of the third congregation of Al- 
bany, to suppress all further process against 
the Rev. Hooper Gumming, and to proceed, 
forthwith, to install him as their pastor, can- 
not be granted. 

And that for the following reasons : 
1st. Because it is evident, that from a par- 
tial derangement, or some other cause, Mr. 
Cumming's conduct, whilst within our bounds, 
has in frequent and repeated instances, been 
such as to bring a slur on the ministerial 
character, and to wound that blessed cause, 
of which he is a professed advocate. 

2d. Because he still persists, notwithstand- 
ing his statement, to deny all those things 
which presbytery, are sorry to have it to say, 
they fear can be too fully proved against him, 
and is thereby giving evidence, that he is, 
even now, not perfectly in his right mind, or 
is so far aberrating from the path of duty, that 
presbytery cannot discharge the all-important 
trust committed to them, by the great head 
of the church, and answer it to their conscien- 
ces, and their God, if they should comply 



9K) 

with the petition of that congregation and the Mr - f4™" 
desire ot Mr. dimming. ai. 



3d. Because your committee are fully of 
the opinion, that the granting of their request f^™mit- 
would be inconsistent in presbytery, as they teeot. tbe 
have been forced to table charges against Mr. g1 t,t I lon ? f 
Cumming, and no reasons whatever nave, as 
yet, been offered to them why they should not 
proceed to the investigation of those charges ; 
unless it be, that of partial derangement, 
which, so far as it has weight, must, in the 
minds of the presbytery, disqualify him, not 
only for the discharge of the pastoral office, 
but for a preacher of the word. 

4th. Because not to issue the trial, now in 
train, in some way or other, must be injuri- 
ous to the congregation from which the re- 
quest is made, inasmuch as it must even be 
injurious to any people to have a man placed 
over them who does not, in the public esti- 
mation, uniformly support the ministerial 
character, whatever may be the opinion of 
the people of his immediate charge to the con- 
trary. 

5th. Because such a course of procedure as 
the request contemplates, cannot fail to be 
most injurious to Mr. Cumming himself. He 
has joined issue, thrown himself upon his tri- 
al, and repeatedly declared, that it was his 
earnest desire to provoke the contemplated 
investigation ; nothing, therefore, can free him 
from the accusation of shrinking from this in- 
vestigation, only proceeding and bringing 
this, too long procrastinated business, to some 
issue. 

6th. Because, in the opinion of your com- 
mittee, nothing but the issuing of this busi- 
ness, can calm the agitated state of the church- 
es, and of the public mind. 



328 
Mr P"?T Your committee, therefore, with the vert 

nimg's In- . , . , , . ,. . , . " 

ai. cursory view, which their limited tune has 

v ^ p v^>' enabled them to take, do express it as their 
Report of opinion, that every consideration of charity 

a commit- ■ , . , ^ . , , . , ._ _ * 

tee on the and equity, do require, that the trial of Mr. 
petition of Cummins be not relinquished but be issued 

3d church. », 1 . 

and brought to some conclusion. 
SIMON HOSACK, ^ 
NOAH M. WELLS, yCorttee. 
S. DEFORREST, J 
It was moved and seconded, that the above 
report, be adopted ; but before the question 
was put, Mr. Hand requested that the mod- 
erator might be sworn, as witness, on the sub- 
ject of Mr. Cummings insanity. 

The request was granted, Dr. Nott was 
sworn and testified as follows : 
Testimony " That Mr. dimming was originally in- 
of Dr.Nott troduced to him as a deranged man ; that all 
Mr* clim- the information he had since received from 
ming's in- n j s parents and friends, assumed the met of 
sani y ' his derangement ; and that the impressions, 
thus made upon his mind, had been strength- 
ened by his own acquaintance with him. 

Witness would not be understood that his 
opinion had been uniform, or that it was now 
settled; on the contrary, it had wavered with 
the changeful appearances Mr. Cumming's 
character assumed. At one time he had dis- 
covered so much art and system, at another 
so little, th it it was difficult to form an opin- 
ion concerning him, and painful to be called 
to express one. It had however been his pre- 
vailing opinion, that he was partially derang- 
ed; and whatever the character of that de- 
rangement was, whether intellectual or moral, 
the statement Mr. dimming had now made, 
furnished conclusive evidence, that he was 
still labouring under it. Mr. dimming did 



229 

not apoear to have any consciousness that his Ml - Cum * 

1 . r r i • mine's l'ri- 

present statement ot tacts was at variance a i. 
with his previous statements; or to have any v^vW 
recollection of having preached other men's Te ^"»ony 
sermons, the proof of which was so abundant, respecting 
As little did he appear to have any recollec- Mr CT , t . um " 
tion of the repeated concessions and promises sanity. 
he had ma le on this subject, to those chris- 
tian friends who had conversed with him con- 
cerning it, previous to its having- become a 
subject of discipline ; nor did he appear to 
have any recollection of any of those repeat- 
ed and successive decl rations which he had 
made, relative to his having placed his man- 
uscripts in I he hands of the Chancellor. 
There was a strange obliquity in Mr. Cum- 
mings statements and conduct, that was diffi- 
cult to explain. It appeared to the wit- 
ness either that Mr. Cumming did not make 
those distinctions between truth and false- 
hood, th it other men made, or that he did 
not feel those obligations which other men 
felt. He often made statements in open 
presbytery, and sometimes appealed with ap- 
parent sincerity for the truth of what he said, 
to those very members who, he must know (if 
he was in his right mind) were perfectly ac- 
quainted with the incorrectness of his state- 
ments ; and yet witness had not been able to 
discover at the time any indication of distrust 
or of compunction in his manner, or in the 
expression of his countenance. 

Indeed if Mr. Cumming was not a derang- 
ed man, he was, in the conformation of his 
mind, unlike (particularly on the article of 
truth) to any other human being with which 
witness had been acquainted ; and his con- 
duct presented a moral phenomenon he was 



230 

Mr, Cam- ima ble to explain, and concerning which he 
™i' Dgs was reluctant to decide." 



The following question was then put by 

respecting Ques. Did you not think Mr. dimming so 
Mr. Cum- deranged, when he made those statements, 
sanity! *" that he did not know what he said ? 

To which the witness replied, 

Ans. " I cannot say that I ever saw him 
in that state." 

It was asked by Mr Hand, 

2. Did you not refuse to administer an oath 
to him on the ground of insanity ? 

The witness replied, 

Ans. I intimated my doubts as to his en- 
tire sanity at the instance of Capt. Bosworth, 
who knew him well, and who informed me 
that he and other of his acquaintances were 
willing to testify that they thought him de- 
ranged. 

Mr. Hand then asked, 

2. Do you believe he is a fit subject for 
trial ? 

The witness answered, 

" I have heretofore stated, that while I 
doubted his sanity, I should be unwilling to 
try him by the rules by which I would try a 
minister of whose sanity I had no doubt. His 
case was one that presented peculiar embar- 
rassments. It was difficult to say what was 
the cause of his aberrations, and therefore 
difficult to decide upon the moral character of 
them. While in a state of doubt, witness 
could lean to the side of mercy, and putting 
the most charitable construction on his con- 
duct, treat him with forbearance and with 
kindness, and leave him in the hands of God, 
till his character should be furtherdeveloped." 

On motion, Resolved, That the vote on the 



2Z\ 

acceptance of the committee's report be for Mr f U J?". 

., r , r ming'sl ri- 

the present postponed. ai. 

The moderator then produced a letter ad- v^yW 
dressed to himself, by the Rev. Dr. Griffin, 
dated Newark, (LvJ.) April 16, 1817, which 
was read, and is in the words following : 

" Rev. and dear sir. 

" The friends of Mr. dimming here, feel £* te J r 
very grateful to you for your tender and faith- Griffin to 
ful treatment of him, and myself anions the Dr - N ° t * 

Tir h. . . o „ ., respecting 

rest. We are sorry to hear that he has tall- Mr.Cum- 
en into new indiscretions and new troubles, ™j[g' 8 in - 
and that he has been the occasion of involv- 
ing you in so much perplexity. His parents 
agree with me that he ought from this time 
to give up all ideas of ever preaching again. 
If he is ever to be restored to a sound mind, 
we are now convinced it must be in some re- 
tired condition and some private employ- 
ment, in which he himself at least shall have 
given up all ideas of returning to the ministry. 
If he does not wholly relinquish such a tho't, 
his mind never will be at rest till he gets 
back into the pulpit again ; at the same time, 
we have that full persuasion of his derange- 
ment, that we cannot but wish and hope 
that he may be let off in an easy manner. 
Should the presbytery pronounce him derang- 
ed and unfit to preach in his present state, his 
friends here would be satisfied. 

" That he is partially insane, we cannot 
permit ourselves to doubt. For the four years 
that he was, more or less, under my eye, af- 
ter he became serious, (and most of the time 
my pupil, or a member of my family) he was 
most amiable in his disposition, correct in his 
conduct, and loved by all around him. I nev- 
er knew a young man more beloved, my very 
domestics idolized him. His dispositions. 



ana 

M . r ' , C T" from a child, were very amiable, and wholly 

ming'sln- ,.~, _ , . J ,. . - 

ai. dinerent from what they appeared since that 

v^v^»- fatal shock which he received at Patterson. 
Letter jr or a fortnight after the death of his wife, he 

from Dr. 1 P » 1 t> 1 . . . 

Griffin to was crushed. At the end ot that time his 
Jes ecu" mo * ner saw > one morning when he came out 
Mr. (um- of his chamber, an evident change, from the 
^anit'* " deepest depression, to insensibility and frivol- 
ity. The cord was snapped. In a few days 
he was riding with a gay young girl, and as I 
am informed, offering her his hand. He was 
seen, about the same time, riding on horse- 
back, through the streets of Newark, in full 
speed, with his hat in his hand. Different 
friends, when they first visited him about that 
time, found him insensible and frivolous, and 
perceived the hurried air and phrenzied eye, 
which suggested the true cause of his strange 
appearance. From the moment that I hear- 
ed of the death of his wife, I was apprehensive 
of such an effect ; and in the autumn I received 
a letter from him which so clearly disclosed a 
morbid imagination as to awaken the most se- 
rious apprehensions. The following winter 
and spring his troubles at Newark began. 
Ever since the death of his wife, his parents 
have seen a great change in all his disposi- 
tions. When I returned to Newark, 1 too 
could see his derangement in every motion. 
The idiotism of much of his conduct, I can 
account for on no other principle. Selfishness, 
with a spark of common sense, would have 
dictated a different course. As to his depar- 
ture from the truth, I find that when he was 
a school boy he was constitutionally addicted 
to that sin ; and although it disappeared at 
maturer age, yet it is a well known effect of 
insanity to render every constitutional defect 
more prominent. Our presbytery restored 



*3S 

him to his office bv the advice of phvsicians, Mr ^ u1to : 
as a medicinal experiment ; that experimental. 
is made and we have done I wih he could 



be kept away from presbytery on the day ap- J^ e £ 
pointed for his tri 1 ; yet I should be unvvil- Griffin to 
ling to have him leave Albany before that Dr ' ^?" 

«.• m . • i iiii i ■ ii respecting 

time, lest it should look to those, who doubt Mr Com- 
his derangement like running away As soon mia £* "»- 
as his case is decided upon, I hope you will 
prevail upon him to return immediately to 
Newark, with his family. It is to be hoped 
that the evidence which the presbytery has of 
his derangement, will save them the trouble 
of a formal trial. Our presbytery, before my 
return from Bo ton, dismissed all charges 
against him, on the ground of insanity. 
" I am, dear sir, with much esteem; 
" your friend and brother. 
(Signed) " E. D. GRIFFIN.' 5 

He also laid before presbytery a letter ad- 
dressed to himself by Gen. dimming, the 
father of the Rev. Mr. Cummino", dated New- 
ark, June 4th, 1817, which was read, and is 
in the words following : 

" My dear sir. 

" Some time more than I expected has Letter 
been lost in forwarding the papers 1 promis- [ rom Gen ' 

i t i ii i 7 i • dimming 

ed. 1 hardly know what to advise, so many to Dr. tt 
difficulties stand in the wav. If mv son coul-1 f! s P ectin s 
by any means be liberated trom the govern- insanity. 
ment of presbytery, I believe it will be best 
for him, and perhaps it may plea-e God. to 
restore to him his former state of mind. I 
have thought, if it should please God to 
bring him on a bed of sickr ss, and reduce 
his body without affecting his head, that per- 
haps he might be again restored to right rea- 
son. He is in the han is of God, with whom 
I must leave him, trusting in his mercy thro' 
30 



2&4 

Mr. cuui- Christ, knowing I nor he deserve nothing. 

mmg'slri- . n e . ° 

a i. by reason of our sins. 

v ^yW "I am, dear sir, with many thanks for 

your past services, and reiving on your 
friendship, yours most respectfully. 
J.N. CUMMING." 

He further presented a second letter from 
Dr. Griffin, dated June 4th, 1817, which 
was read, and is as follows : 

Second let- « ft fv anc [ d ear s ( r 

ter from . 

Dr.uriffin " hiDce you left us, 1 have received vour 

Noare- favor of April 2 1 st, and that of April 30th. 
specting You will deem the time long that I have been 
SLET silen *, and so I do myself. But I have been 

ming'8 in- . . ' ./ . „ 

sanity. waiting for a copy of the testimony given in 
before presbytery, respecting the st ite of Mr. 
Cumming's mind. To-day it has arrived, 
I never saw it before, and I do not think that 
it contains the best proof that could be exhi- 
bited. The sudden change at the end of the 
first fortnight after his wife's death, which 
has continued ; his extravagant fondness for 
trinkets ; his contracting a debt of 82500 by 
such extravagances ; the general and aston- 
ishing change of the whole man ; the foolish- 
ness of most of his irregularities, which self- 
ishness itself, with a sound intellect, would 
restrain ; his insensibility under his greatest 
trials, and sinking into sleep, as soon as his 
head touched the pillow, at a time when his 
distressed father spent a wakeful night by his 
side; the prominence given to all his natural 
faults, a common effect of insanity ; these 
and other proofs are by no means set in as 
strong a light, as they might be in the testi- 
mony. So far as 1 know, it is the general 
opinion here that he is partially insane. I 
suspect there are few persons in this neigh- 



3S5 

bourhood who seriouslv doubt it ; and not one Mr - , c "^" 

.... ' nnng's tri- 

among his intimate acquaintances. ai. 

" Under these circumstances, for the pres- ^Mi^ 
bytery, to proceed against him, as a sane J e e r 0O " o d ( J 1 et ' 
person, would be an event, in my opinion, Dr. Griffin 
deepl v to be deplored. Past experience shows, *° Dr - 

11 i • i i t> -ii-i i Nott res- 

wh.it the philosophy of mind plainly teaches, pec ting 
that such a course would not reclaim, but VIr ^T" 
render him more irregular. A mind diseas- sanity. 
ed by affliction is not to be cured by afflic- 
tion, but by kindness. 

At the same time I feel deeply for the 
presbytery. Connected as he is with them, 
they are, in the eyes of many, responsible for 
his conduct. I wish it were possible for hiha 
to be fairly detached from every Judicatory 
on earth, without its being brought about by 
way of punishment ; for 1 do not believe him 
a proper subject of discipline, and I would 
not punish disease. Were he perfectly insu- 
lated, his conduct could attach no censure to 
any church. How this can be brought about 
is harder to say. Suppose he should put 
in his declination, and the presbytery should 
simply record the fact, that he had withdrawn 
from them, and was no longer to be consid- 
ered a member, and had done it under so 
many signs of derangement, that they thought 
proper to take no further steps. On the 
whole, this appears the most feasible and 
prudent course. And I believe if I was sure 
of not displeasing presbytery, I would give 
this advice. (Signed) 

"E.D. GRIFFIN.'' 

The above letters were placed on the files 
of presbytery. 

The following resolution was then offered 
and seconded : 

Resolved, As the sense of this presbytery. 



256 

^in vrvi ^ at tnere * s su ffi c > ent evidence before presby- 
ming s n ^^ ^ at ^ e Rev.Hooper Gumming has been 
v ^y^ / in a state of partial derangement previous to 
his coming within our bounds ; that there is 
at least, probable ground for believing that 
this has been the case, since that period, and 
still continues. 

Rev. Dr. Coe, in behalf of the commission- 
ers from the third church, requested that they 
be admitted for the purpose of giving testi- 
mony on the question of Mr. Cumming's san- 
ity of mind. 

The request was granted, and John Van 
Ness Yates, Esq. being introduced and sworn, 
testified as follows : 
Testimony « j nave attended Mr. Cumming's church 
missioners regularly, since he came to Albany, and have 
t° >lr ; , been much edified by his ministry. As to his 
*anUy. ,n§S insanity, it is an idea that strikes so ludi- 
crously that I do not know what to say. It 
appears to me, that for a person to carry on 
a regular discourse, make a regular prayer, 
and be regular in conversation, and yet be 
insane, appears impossible. As to his pres- 
ent insanity, I have no belief in it. 1 had no 
knowledge of Mr. Cumming before he came 
to Albany." 

Mr. Yates having withdrawn, Mr. Solo- 
mon Southwick was introduced and sworn, 
and testified as follows : 

" Since the trial of Mr. Chester, I have at- 
tended Mr. Cumming's church, and been fre- 
quently at his house I never discovered any 
symptoms of insanity, nor do I believe that 
he is insane in any shape or degree." 

Mr. Southwick then withdrew, and Mr. 
John M'Lachlin was introduced, and sworn. 
His testimony is as follows : 

et Since Mr. dimming has been in Albany, 



an 

I have frequently seen him, and there never Jf/'^fJ. 
appeared any insanity about him when I saw ai. 

John T. B. Graham was next introduced, ^ m c ™ y . 
and sworn, and testified as follows: missioned 

" I was first acquainted with Mr. Cum- * oMr \ , 
nung in rebruary last. Since that time 1 sanity. 
have been with him almost every day, and 
have never seen any thing: that denoted in- 
sanity I believe him to be as sane as any 
man on earth." 

Mr. Graham declared that he had no doubt 
th it the testimony of all the other commis- 
sioners would be to the same effect. 

The foregoing testimony, expressive of the 
opinion of Mr. Cumming's commissioners, 
relative to his sanity since he has been in Al- 
bany, and his present sanity (though entire 
credit be given to the sincerity of that opin- 
ion and to the truth of the facts on which the 
same is founded) did not appear to furnish a 
sufficient reason for reconsidering the judg- 
ment of this presbytery as already expressed. 

1st. Because Mr. Cumming's derangement 
is adjudged to be partial merely, and a kind 
of derangement compatible with rational con- 
versation, except so far as truth is concerned, 
and compatible also with the delivery of re- 
gular discourses and solemn and impressive 
prayers. 

2d. Because the said testimony does not go 
to give any solution of Mr. Cumming's per- 
sisting, for a great length of time, in preach- 
ing other men's sermons, contrary to his sol- 
emn and repeated promises, and regardless 
of the successive dilficulties in which he thus 
became involved. 

3d. Because it gives no solution of his hav- 
ing formed the strange conception, that the 



Mr. Cum- re port of his preaching other men's sermons, 

ming's In- > . r p ' 

ai. was a slander, and of his having submitted 

v <^vW his manuscripts to Chancellor Kent, and by 
him been acquitted of plagiarism. 

4th. Because it gives no solution of his pres- 
ent want of all consciousness of having, in any 
instance, preached other men's sermons, of 
which fact there is such abundant evidence 
already before this court. 

5. Because it leaves, unexplained, his de- 
clared want of all recollection at the present, 
of his having; told Mr. Webster, or any other 
person, that he had submitted his manuscripts 
to Chancellor Kent, as well as his declared 
ignorance of other points of the truth, of 
which there is plenary evidence before this 
court ; which declarations now made can on- 
ly be explained by supposing him still under 
the influence of that strange derangement, to 
which he is subject, whatever its nature may 
be and whichever of his faculties, whether 
intellectual or moral, may be the seat of this 
derangement. Whereupon the following 
resolutions were presented by Mr. Stansbury 
and seconded : 
Uons offer- Resolved, That this presbytery do not view 
ed on the the Rev. Hooper Cumming as a fit subject 
^. ,e for discipline. 

Resolved, That the further prosecution of 
the libel now pending be dispensed with. 

Resolved, That the request of the third 
church, Albany, for Mr. Cumming's install- 
ation, be not granted. 

Resolved, That this presbytery do not view 
themselves as responsible for any of the acts 
of the Rev. Hooper Cumming, either public 
or private. 

The question was put on the resolutions 
severally, and the three first having passed in 



339 

the affirmative, before the question was tak- M, -^ u, r u *. 
en oa the fourth, Mr. Hand presented to pres- ai. 
byterv a paper in the word* following ; v^yW 

" The commissioners from the third pres- JJU^ "J. 
bvterian church in the city of Albany, instruct utions to 
the elder from that church to state to presby- Jj dismiss ' 
terv, in case the Rev. Hooper Gumming be 
not immediately installed, that then the said 
congregation and its pastor, request a regular 
dismission from the said presbytery. By unan- 
imous order of the commissioners. 

(Signed) JOHN M'MILLAN, CA'ii. 
HOOPER CUMMING." 

Whereupon Resolved, That the request of The peti- 
the third congregation in Albany, to be dis- tion s rant - 
missed from under the care of this presbyte- 
ry, be granted. 

Resolved, That the Rev. Hooper dimming, Mr. Cum- 
against whom certain charges have been pre- min g. is 
ferred, but who, as this presbytery have pro- to with- 
bable grounds to believe, labours under a draw> 
partial derangement of mind, and has for that 
reason been adjudged an unfit subject of dis- 
cipline, be permitted, at his own request, 
to withdraw from all further connexion with 
this presbytery ; but that itisnot in the pow- 
er of this presbytery to pronounce him in re- but 
gular standing, or to hold themselves in any in good 
wise, responsible for his future acts, either staBdin e- 
public or private. 

The doors being opened, the above deter- M c 
mination of presbytery, was publicly read to ming takes 
Mr. Gumming and the commissioners from '^ °^ 
the third church, when Mr. Cumming having ery. 
made a farewell address to several of the 
members, took his final leave of the presby- 
tery, and formally withdrew. 

Whereupon psesbytery came to the follow- 
ing resolution : 



$4& 

Sn g S U i>i- Whereas this presbytery, after instituting 
ai. process against the Rev. Hooper dimming 



for plagiarism, breach of promise, falsehood 
^J/ 650 " an- i intemperance, and twice citing him to 
hereon, trial, has seen cause from the whole circum- 
stance of his case to apprehend, that he is, and 
for some time past,h -is been partially derang- 
ed in mind ; and whereas, the said Rev. 
Hooper Cumming has now formally with- 
drawn from under its care, in consequence 
whereof, this presbytery has no further inspec- 
tion or jurisdiction over the said Hooper Cum- 
ming, who has gone out from them, and must 
be left in the hands of God, who is able to 
restore him to his right mind, and bring him 
back to a sense of his duty. Therefore, 

Resolved, That his name be erased from 
the roll of this presbytery, in whose connex- 
ion, and under whose sanction he no longer 
exercises his ministry. 

Adjourned. Closed with prayer. 

CHARLTON, JUGUST 19th, 1817. 
Presbytery met according to adjournment, 
and was constituted with prayer by the mod- 
erator. 

PRESENT AS FOLLOWS. 
MINISTERS. 

Rev.ELIPHALET NOTT, D.D. Moderator. 

Members SIMON HOSACK, D D. 

court THOMAS HALLIDAY, 

ARTHUR J. STANSBURY, 
HALSEY A. WOOD, 
REUBEN SMITH. 

ELDERS. 

John Robinson, Princetown, 

Philo Hind, E. Galway, 

Nathaniel Booth, Ballston, 

Daniel Chandler, Schenectady. 



ming'8 Tri- 



341 

James Taylor, Charlton, !£j?£ 

Abraham Beecher, Edingburg, 
David Otis, West-Galway. 

A petition from the third church, in Albany, JJj- Cu ™:^ 
and from the Rev. Hooper Cumming, for the tions for a 
dismission of Mr. Cumming: in good standing, < r,sm,9S j OQ 
was received, read, and referred to a commit- standing. 
tee, consisting of Dr. Hosack, Mr. Halliday 
and Mr. Stansbury, to report thereon. 

The committee to whom was referred the 
petition from the third church, Albany, pre- 
sented a report which was read, adopted, and 
is as follows : 

The committee to whom was referred the 
petition of the presbyterian congregation in 
Montgomery-street, late the third church 
in Albany, for the dismission in good and re- 
gular standing of the Rev. Hooper Cumming, 
from this presbytery, together with the con- 
curring request of Mr. Cumming for the same, 
beg leave to 

REPORT : 

That they have considered the petition, re- Re P ort ?} 
ferred to them, and are ot opinion that the tee on hi* 
prayer of the petition cannot be granted. petition. 

1st. Because, Mr. Cumming is not under 
the care of this presbytery, and therefore can- 
not be dismissed from under its care. 

2d. Because, at the time of his withdraw- 
ing, the presbytery expressly declared, that 
they could not dismiss him as a minister in 
good standing, and nothing, to their knowl- 
edge, has since occurred to alter his stand- 
ing. 

The committee therefore recommend, to 
presbytery, the following resolution : 

" Whereas this presbytery, at its meeting 
in the city of Schenectady, on the 24th day of 
July last, did pass the following resolution, 
31 



Sgvw-^ 2 - "Rooked, that the Rev. Hooper Cum- 
ai. ming, against whom certain charges have 

v ^v^»' been preferred, but who as this presbytery 
tSnJport ^ ave P rooaD l e grounds to believe, labours un- 
on Mr. der a partial derangement of mind, and has 
$" m " for that reason been adjudged an unfit sub- 

ming's pe- . • 1 

tition. ject of dicipline. be permitted, at his own re- 
quest, to withdraw from all further connex- 
ion with this presbytery ; but that it is not in 
the power of this presbytery to pronounce him 
in regular standing, or to hold themselves in 
any wise responsible for his future acts, either 
public or private." 

And whereas, the Rev. Hooper Cumming 
immediately thereupon did take his final leave 
of the presbytery, and formally withdrew. 

And whereas, presbytery did thereupon pass 
a further resolution, " that his name be eras- 
ed from the roll of this presbytery, in whose 
connexion, and under whose sanction he no 
longer exercises his ministry." 

Therefore, Resolved, That this presbytery, 
having no further official connexion with the 
said Hooper Curaming, cannot pass any of- 
ficial act respecting him ; and that the pray- 
er of the petition be dismissed. 
(Signed) SIMON HOSACK, ^ O 

THOMAS HALLIDAY, >1 
A. J. STANSBURY, 

The report was adopted. Whereupon the 
commissioners from the church in Montgom- 
ery-street presented a paper in the words fol- 
lowing : 
Mr Cum- " I do hereby in the most solemn manner 
ming pro- protest against the proceedings of the pres- 
tests and bvtery of Albany, in reference to the appli- 

appealsto J .■ J j 1 / 1 i- • • 

Synod. cation made by me tor a regular dismission. 
And I hereby declare my determination to 



34& 

appeal to the Synod of Albany on this sub- M £ ^ 
ject, at their next session. ai!" 

(Signed) " HOOPER GUMMING." s*p\^ 
<4 Albany, Aug. 19, 1817." Mr.Cm- 

• ~ ciintr pro- 

Mr. Halliday moved that this pnper be re- tests and 
ceivedand recorded on the minutes. Xhe^P^ lst0 
motion was amended by Mr. Stansbury, as * 
follows : 

" Resolved, That although no protest can 
be regularly received from a person who has 
formally withdrawn, and is no longer in con- 
nexion with this judicatory ; yet in view of 
Mr. Cummings peculiar circumstances, and 
as an act of indulgence, in the same spirit 
which has been manifested by this court 
throughout the whole of its transactions to- 
wards him, the same be permitted to go up- 
on the minutes of the presbytery. 

The question being taken on the above re- 
solution, it passed in the negative, but hav- 
ing, on motion of Dr. Nott, been reconsider- 
ed, it passed unanimously in the affirmative. 

Adjourned. Closed with prayer. 

SCHENECTADY, OCTOBER 1, 1817. 
Presbytery met according to adjournment, 
and was constituted with prayer by the Rev. 
Arthur J. Stansbury, who was called to the 
chair in the absence of the moderator. 

PRESENT. 
MINISTERS. 

Rev. SIMON HOSACK, D. D. 
THOMAS HALLIDAY, 

JOHN^ CHESTER, Members 

ARTHUR J. STANSBURY, 
NOAH M WELLS, 
HALSEYA WOOD, 
KEUBEN SMITH. 



of the 
court. 






£44? 

a * r - , Cum - ELDERS. 

ai'. nss Nehemiah B. Bassett, 1st church, Albany, 
John Brown, Charlton. 

The stated clerk informed presbytery, that 
a paper purporting to be an appeal from the 
church in Montgomery-street, Albany, hap! 
been submitted to the committee of overtures 
appointed by the Synod of Albany, now in 
session, and by that committee laid before \ 
Synod. Whereupon, 

Resolved, That Dr. Nott, Mr. Stansbury, 
and Mr. Wood be a committee to defend the 
presbytery thereon, before the Synod. 

SCHENECTADY, Qlst OCTOBEF, 1817. 
Presbytery met according to adjournment 
and was constituted with prayer. 
present, 
ministers. 
Rev. ELIPHA LET NOTT, D.D. Moderator. 
ARTHUR J. STANSBURY, 

Members JOHN CHESTER, 

HALSEY A. WOOD, 
REUBEN SMITH. 

ELDER. 

Nehemiah B. Bassett, 1st church, Albany. 

The committee appointed to defend the 
presbytery before Synod, reported as follows : 

The committee appointed to defend the 
preshytery of Albany before the Synod of Al- 
bany, on a document purporting to be an ap- 
peal from the third presbyterian church in Al- 
bany, beg leave to report : 

That the paper referred to is in the words 
following : 

To the Reverend Synod of Albany. 

The respectful Appeal of the elders and 
trustees of the third presbyterian church in the 
rity of Albany, in behalf of themselves, their 



of the 
court. 






24*5 

pastor, and the congregation they represent. **£ £ u r °^ 

The appellants, considering themselves ai. 
deeply aggrieved by certain proceedings of y ^v^' 
the presbytery of Albany, deem it a duty they t ^ p /,d e ° 9 f 
owe to themselves, the church, and their im- and trus- 
niediate constituents, respectfully and sol- *JJ^ M 
emnly to protest against the same, and to 
appeal to your reverend body for redress. 

The appellants represent that they have 
heretofore earnestly prayed the presbytery of 
Albany to proceed to the installation of their 
pastor, the Rev. Mr. Cumming, and stating 
in strong yet respectful terms the necessity of 
such a measure, and its great importance to 
the true interests of religion, and particular- 
ly to the numerous congregation of chris- 
tians over which they preside. 

The appellants have repeatedly set forth to 
the presbytery, the peculiar circumstances un- 
der which their church was instituted, the 
great expense to which they had been sub- 
jected, and the solemn pledge which the ap- 
pellants deemed that the presbytery bad giv- 
en to install the Reverend Mr. Cumming, by 
permitting him to separate himself from the 
presbyterian church in the city of Schenecta- 
dy, with which he was then connected, re- 
cording an honorable dismission from that 
congregation, and permitting a presentation 
of a call from this church, and its accept- 
ance, to be also passed upon and recorded, 
without any objection whatever ; for which, 
and other circumstances fully detailed, con- 
nected with this transaction, your memorial- 
ists beg leave to refer your reverend body to 
their memorials and other documents exhibit- 
ed to the presbytery, and presumed to be on 
their files. 

Notwithstanding these appeals to the chris- 



346 



M . r - pj": tian benevolence and brotherly love of the 
ramgs "■ p res ^y ter y a system has been pursued which 
v ^v^' threatens to create discontent and disquiet in 

J h Ppe id I ° f *^ e mmc * s °f a verv g reat D °dy of christians, 
and truV and is calculated to excite a serious if not a 
chur°h 3(1 P errnanent division and schism in the church, 
to the disgrace of religion and the prejudice 
of the diviue cause of our beloved Master, the 
glorious Redeemer, whose service is perfect 
freedom, and whose whole life was a continu- 
ed illustration of the divine precepts of char- 
ity and love, which he constantly inculcated 
among his disciples. 

The appellants beg leave further to show 
to the reverend Synod, that finding the pres- 
bytery were deaf to their earnest and repeat- 
ed prayers and solicitations, and that the 
church over which they preside was to be ex- 
iled from the sheep fold of its Master, they 
were at length driven to the painful and only 
alternative of requesting, in connexion with 
their pastor, a dismission from a presbytery 
who had refused to hear them or give them 
that christian aid and assistance, which these 
appellants had fondly expected at their hands. 
But even this request, mild, moderate, and 
soothing as it was, was also refused, and un- 
der circumstances (as far as it regards their 
pastor) of the most extraordinary, and we 
were about to add, of the most cruel, irritat- 
ing and insulting nature. 

To prove this, the appellants beg leave to 
submit, to the reverend Synod, a copy of some 
of the proceedings of the presbytery. They 
think it not necessary, at the present moment, 
to set forth all the proceedings of the presby- 
tery with regard to the appellants, though 
they deem them alike exceptionable and un- 
just ; proceedings, which they regret to say 



341 

have done more to injure the vital interests of ^ J^". 
religion, th in the scoffs and ridicule of the ai. 
infidel or profane. v^v^ 

The particular part of those proceedings, ^ p e e ,d e ° s f 
from which the appellants appeal, are as fol- and tru«- 

low« ■ tees of 3d 

"On motion, Resolved, 1 hat the request 
of the third congregation in Albany, to be 
dismissed from under the care of this presby- 
tery, be granted. 

" Resolved, That the Rev. Hooper Cum- 
ming, ao-ainst whom certain charges have 
been preferred, but who, as this presbytery 
have probable grounds to believe, labours 
under a partial derangement of mind, and 
who has for that reason, been adjudged an 
unfit subject of discipline, be permitted, at his 
own request, to withdraw from all further con- 
nexion with this presbytery ; but that it is not 
in the power of this presbytery to pronounce 
him in regular standing, or to hold themselves, 
in any wise, responsible for his future acts, 
either public or private." 

From these resolutions the appellants re- 
spectfully appeal to the reverend Synod ; be- 
cause, 

1st. Those resolutions are a manifest vio- 
lation of that first principle and fundamental 
rule in civil as well as in ecclesiastical juris- 
prudence, that no censure or condemnation 
can be pronounced on conjecture, belief, or 
" probable grounds," but must solely emanate 
from proof, and after the accused has had a 
fair opportunity to be heard and confronted 
with his accusers. 

2d. Because the presbytery, in deciding, 
that the Rev. Mr. Cumming was at present 
partially deranged, rejected the positive and 
uncontradicted testimony of four witnesses, 



£48 

^ r - f u ^. unimpeached, and, we venture to assert, unim- 

ai! D§ " peachable; thus trifling with the solemnity of 

^^v^ an oath, and proving a mere mockery of ec- 

tbe Pe iden c ^ es * as ti ca l investigation ; and it might be ad- 

and trus- ded, the testimony of the whole congregation 

tees of Sd over wmcn ne presides (consisting of more 

than one thousand souls) whose evidence 

were offered, but by a vote of the presbytery 

or a resolution entered for that purpose, whs 

deemed unnecessary to be produced ; to say 

nothing of the flagrant insult thus offered to 

the good sense and understanding of the whole 

community, as well as many of the public 

functionaries of this state. 

3d. Because there is a manifest inconsisten- 
cy, if not a palpable absurdity, in that vote 
of the presbytery, which permits the congre- 
gation, of which the Rev. Mr. Cumming is the 
pastor, to be dismissed from the presbytery 
without any condition annexed thereto, and 
yet refuses the same right to the Rev. Mr. 
Cumming himself, ci the ground of his pres- 
ent insanity. Whereas, if th<t vote of the 
presbytery were true, it would be a strong 
ground to suspect the sanity of his congrega- 
tion, and thus both, or neither, were entitled 
to the same dismission. Thus the presbyte- 
ry have indicated a fearful, temporising and 
inconsistent policy ; inconsistent with that 
magnanimity and justice which should char- 
acterize the proceedings of every religious 
institution. 

4th. Because the presbytery, by permitting, 
at one of its repeated secret meetings, certain 
proceedings on the trial of the Rev. Mr. 
Chester to be read in evidence against the 
Rev. Mr. Cumming, committed flagrant and 
manifest injustice upon the rights of the ap- 
pellants, inasmuch as no evidence ought to 



34<a 

have been admitted, in secret, in the absence ^ ■ ^™£ 
of an accused party, who would be thus pre- ai. 
eluded from a due defence ; nor were such N ^ "^ 
proceedings in any c »se admissible evidence ^eeWer*/ 
against the Rev Mr. dimming, when it was ami mis- 
well known to every member of the presbyte- ^ s r °£. 5d 
rv, that on the trial of the Rev. Mr. Chester, 
the Rev. Mr. dimming was excluded from 
being present at the examination of the wit- 
nesses, on the ground of his being himself a 
witness ; thu* depriving him of the riglit so 
dear to every citizen, and to every christian, 
of hearing the evidence ottered against him, 
and thus rendering that evidence wholly in- 
admissible and improper against him. Be- 
sides, to add to this history of strange events, 
when the Rev. Mr. dimming was called up- 
on to testify as a witness, he was rejected by 
this same presbytery on the ground of being a 
party. Thus it is evident, as your appellants 
conceive, that either the Rev. Mr. dimming 
was unjustly and improperly rejected as a 
witness on the trial of the Rev. Mr. Chester, 
or he was unjustly and improperly excluded 
from being present at the said trial, and in 
either point of view, such proceedings ought 
never to have been afterwards read or receiv- 
ed as evidence against the Rev. Mr. Cum- 
ming. In addition to all this, the appellants 
beg leave to observe, that the course adopt- 
ed on the trial of the Rev. Mr. Chester, was 
not only a manifest violation of the first prin- 
ciples of natural equity and justice, but as 
the questions permitted to be put on that tri- 
al, had a tendency rather to impeach the 
character of the Rev. Mr. dimming than to 
try the charges preferred against the Rev. 
Mr. Chester ; and as such course was directly 
opposed to the written directions and opin- 



250 

iSn YTrl- * on °* ^ e mo ^ erator (whatever change that 
ai nS ' opinion may have afterwards suffered) such 



proceedings were grossly irregular and unjust. 
Appeal of 5 Because the whole course of proceeding 

the elders . . . .. . . r S 

and trus- ot the said presbytery, in regard to the Kev. 
ch eS r °h 3d ^ r * Gumming and his congregation, has been 
in no way accordant with the true spirit of 
the christian religion, as the appellants hum- 
bly conceive, and altogether calculated to de- 
stroy that harmony and love, which should 
ever adorn and elevate the tenets we acknowl- 
edge to profess, and by which the true chris- 
tian is, or ought, ever to be regulated. 

For these and many other reasons, deemed 
unnecessary to be detailed, the aj ptllants do 
hereby enter their appeal against the pro- 
ceedings of presbytery, and do hereby pray 
the reverend Synod to reverse the same so far 
as may enable the Rev. Mr. Cumming and 
his congregation, to retire from the connex- 
ion with the said presbytery, and to become 
connected with some other ecclesiastical body. 
And earnestly praying, that through the aid 
of the Divine Grace, your reverend body may 
be directed to such a course as will contri- 
bute to the good of the church and the honor 
of religion ; the appellants respectfully sub- 
scribe themselves, 

Reverend Synod, 

Your fellow-christians in the Lord. 
(By order.) 

AARON HAND, > ™, 
Wm. MEADON, l^ lders - 
JOHN SHAW, -| 
J. WARREN, 

JOH\ M'LACHLAN, I T 

j fry ylrustees. 

HUGH HUMPHREY, 
JOHN WADE, 



251 

John T. B. Graham, Esq. appointed com- Mr - J"* 
missioner to present this memorial to the rev- a i. 
erend Synod of Albany, to meet at Schenec- 
tady, on the 1st October, 1817. 

This document your committee did and do 
still consider as not entitled to the character 
of a regular appeal ; and for the following- 
reasons : 

1st Because the congregation by which it 
is presented, having been at its own request 
dismissed, in July last, from under the care 
of the presbytery of Albany, and not since re- 
ceived either by that or any other presbytery, 
is not in connexion with the Synod of Alba- 
ny, nor under its jurisdiction. 

2d. Because that congregation, even when 
it was in connexion with the presbytery of 
Albany, was not, nor has it since be- 
come a party at issue, either in the cause of 
the Rev. John Chester, of Mr. Mark Tuck- 
er, or of the Rev. Hooper Gumming*. 

3d. Because the document itself, purport- 
ing to be an appeal, has never been entered, 
or presented that it might be entered, on the 
records of the presbytery of Albany ; nor has 
any intimation of its existence been at any 
time given to that presbytery, nor did they 
know of its existence until the document itself 
was read before Synod. 

The appeal itself being on these accounts 
wholly unconstitutional, the presbytery of 
Albany are not in any wise held to answer 
the same. 

Still, however, your committee being ac- 
quainted with the conciliatory spirit felt and 
manifested by this presbytery, through all the 
proceedings to which this appeal refers, be- 
lieve themselves authorized to declare, and 
they did accordingly declare on behalf of the 



1WL 

min ^Tn- P resD y ter y> its consent that the paper above 
ai. recited should be recognized by Synod, as 

though it possessed every character of a reg- 
ular appeal, and should be allowed to have 
the full effect of such an instrument, and 
that the presbytery of Albany were prepared 
for trial thereon, and willing that the same 
should be forthwith issued. 

And your committee further report, that the 
S^nod did thereupon take up the considera- 
tion of the proceedings of the presbytery, in 
relation to the several trials before mentioned, 
as the same appeared upon its minutes, the 
whole of which, with the accompanying do- 
cuments, were read in Synod. And the re- 
port of a committee of Synod thereon having 
declared the act of presbytery in permitting 
the Rev. Hooper dimming, while charged 
with immoralities, to withdraw from its ju- 
risdiction to be not according to presbyterial 
order, your committee did not at all resist 
the adoption of said Report, nor attempt by 
any showing, to p»ove thdt the said act of 
presbytery was according to general pres- 
byterial rule or usage ; and for the following 
reasons : 

1st. Because the presbytery never did view 
its act in allowing the Rev. Hooper Cum- 
ming (whom they had refused dismissing) to 
withdraw from their jurisdiction while charg- 
ed with immoralities, as an act conformable 
to the ordinary and regular discipline of the 
church, but as a departure therefrom in an 
extreme case. 

2d. Because that act admitted of defence 
solely on the ground of expediency, which 
ground was not touched in the report pro- 
posed for the adoption of Synod. Had the 
general question been under consideration, 



i 



£53 

whether tVnt act of presbytery was a proper M . r -9^"'. 
one, your committee would have held them- a i. 
selves bourn I to show in its favour, that, 
though an acknowledged departure from the 
letter of the law. it w;is in a case which lay 
out of the contemplation of the law ; the case 
of an individual who in the judgment of char- 
ity was deemed at the time to be partially de- 
ranged : That such an individual was not 
likely to be benefitted by any formal act of 
moral discipline, but rather by an act of 
indulgence, while at the same time the peace 
and honour of the church might in such a 
case be saved by simply declaring that the 
individual concerned n$ longer exercised his 
ministry under the sanction of presbytery : 
That this course of treatment toward a man 
not certainly sane, was not only more heal- 
ing but more just, than a course of greater 
harshness and severity: And, therefore, tho' 
not within the letter of any rule of Christ's 
house, was nevertheless within the spirit of 
Christ's law. But the general question of 
the propriety of the act was never agitated, 
and therefore your committee did not feel 
themselves called to its vindication. 

And as to all the other acts of presbytery, 
referred to in the appeal, your committee 
were so entirely satisfied of their scrupulous 
correctness, that though additional light might 
have been shed on some of them by expla- 
nation and remark, they were willing that the 
whole should be judged of from the naked re^ 
cord submitted to Synod; and they did accor- 
dingly waive their right of arguing the cause 
of presbytery, and submitted the same to the 



254; 

M } "•V'HJ?" judgment of Synod, from the original docu- 
mmgs n men j. s ^ v^itliOLit comment or illustration. 

All which is respectfully submitted. 
ELIPHALET NOTT, 
ARTHUR J. STANSBURY, 
HALSEY A. WOOD. 

The report was accepted. 

The stated clerk laid before presbytery, the 
following extract from the minutes of Synod : 

The committee to whom the report on the 
records of the presbytery of Albany, together 
with the appeal from the third congregation 
of Albany, were referred, reported the follow- 
ing resolutions as the decision of the Synod on 
said records, and al^o on the several points 
referred to in said appeal, viz. 

The records of the presbytery of Albany, 
having been all read through, so far as relat- 
ed to their proceedings, relative to the trials 
of the Rev. John Chester, Mr. Mark Tucker 
and the Rev. Hooper dimming, 

Resolved, That the same be approved as 
correct and in order, except, so far as relates 
to their allowing the Rev. Hooper Cumming 
to withdraw from under their care, while 
charged with immoralities, which permission 
this Synod deem not presbyterial, the same not 
coming under the general rules of discipline. 

And, whereas, the Rev. Hooper Curnming, 
late a member of the presbytery of Albany, 
has, while charged with immoralities, with- 
drawn from said presbytery. And whereas, 
said presbytery have allowed him to do this, 
on the probable ground of his partial derange- 
ment, a plea which had been set up in his 
behalf by Mr. Aaron Hand, one of his elders. 



255 

Therefore, m £ StJI- 

Resolved, That this Synod no longer re- ai!"* 5 
cognize the said Hooper Gumming as a mem- 
ber of this body, or as a minister of the gos- 
pel in regular standing. 

And for the information of the churches, 
Resolved, That it be recommended to the 
presbytery of Albany, to publish their whole 
proceedings in the above cases, to be sent 
down to the several sessions connected with 
this Synod. 

HEZEKIAH WOODRUFF, Ch'n. 

Resolved, That the stated clerk procure 
and superintend the printing of so much of the 
minutes of this presbytery, as relate to the 
trials of the Rev. Mr. Chester and Mr. Mark 
Tucker, and to the case of the Rev. Hooper 
Cumming ; and that he have so many co- 
pies thereof printed as shall be sufficient to 
supply the respective sessions under the juris- 
diction of the Synod of Albany. 

I certify the foregoing to be a true and 
faithful extract from the minutes of the pres- 
bytery of Albany. 

ARTHUR 7. STANSBURY, 
Stated clerk of presbytery 



¥inis. 



ERRATA. 

27 line 28 for " and" read J. 

36 „ 27 before "tho" read ivhich. 

65 „ 6 for " that" read what, in note. 

102 „ 7 after " than" omit to. 

1 04 „ last after " it" insert would. 

L „ 6 " and their proceedings," is redundant 

110 „ 3 from bottom for "heard" read board. 

137 „ 2 after " account" insert / am. 

155 „ 15 after "it" insert to. 

179 „ 14 for " or" read a. 

181 „ 13 after "conceive" insert but. 

222 „ 19 for "New-Ark" read New-Fork. 

225 „ 26 for " he" read /. 

227 „ 18 for "even" read ever. 

236 „ 19 after "strikes" insert me. 



*+* 






- 
































^ v 





















* ^% V 



^ ^ 



s ,^ 






%%* 






..T' 
















'-.'wX-V./ XVS 



\° °x 



t/'. 









■^% 










